beta
(영문) 부산지방법원 2019.07.18 2019노98

업무방해등

Text

All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,700,000.

The above fine shall be imposed on the defendant.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In relation to the point of interference with the mistake of facts, the defendant did not have the intention or sound, thereby interfering with his business.

With regard to the issue of insult, the Defendant was able to call and pay attention to the victim’s conversations in a large sound, and he did not insult the victim’s abusive language.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court (the first instance judgment: the fine of one million won, and the second instance judgment: the fine of 700,000 won) is too unreasonable.

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant ex officio, the judgment of the court below that made an appeal by the defendant joined each case of the court below that made an appeal by the defendant in the first instance and thus, each crime of the judgment of the court below against the defendant is concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and a single sentence should be sentenced at the same time under Article 38 of the Criminal Act. Thus, the judgment of the court below that made an appeal by the defendant with regard to each

However, the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding of facts is still subject to the judgment of this court, despite the above reasons for ex officio reversal.

3. In light of the spirit of the substantial direct and psychological principle adopted by the Korean Criminal Procedure Act to determine the assertion of mistake, if there are extenuating circumstances to deem that the first instance court’s determination on the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance was clearly erroneous, or if it is not deemed significantly unreasonable to maintain the first instance court’s determination on the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance court, taking account of the results of the first instance court’s examination and the results of additional evidence examination conducted until the closing of argument in the appellate trial, the appellate court should respect the first instance court’s

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Do4994, Nov. 24, 2006). The lower court duly adopted and investigated.