beta
(영문) 수원지방법원 2017.02.08 2016고정2240

경범죄처벌법위반

Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 100,000.

Where the defendant fails to pay the above fine, one hundred thousand won shall be one day.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a person who works as an employee in Suwon-si, Suwon-si C at a work-free shop with a trade name.

On April 23, 2016, the Defendant: (a) around 18:10 on April 23, 2016, the Defendant called 's death', 5,000 won, and 2,000 won with a large sound at a place where many people are in front of the upper class; and (b) provided guests with a business purpose.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of partially the police officers of the accused;

1. Application of regulations records, field photographs, and the current status of receipt of reports, and statutes on the 112 Reporting Case List (limited to the reported data at the time of committing the crime as indicated in the judgment);

1. Relevant provisions of the Act on the Punishment of Minor Offenses and Article 3 (1) 8 of the Punishment of Minor Offenses Act (Optional to the punishment);

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. The defendant and his/her defense counsel regarding the assertion of the defendant and his/her defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the Provisional Payment Order only notified the customers of the excessive value while conducting funeral services in an excessive manner, and did not accept any excessive guest, nor did they accept any damaged customer, and there is no such customer. Thus, the defendant and his/her defense counsel do not commit a crime.

The argument is asserted.

그러나, ① 경범죄 처벌법 제 3조 제 1 항 제 8호에 의하면 ‘ 여러 사람이 모이거나 다니는 곳에서 영업을 목적으로 떠들썩하게 손님을 부르는 행위’, 즉 ‘ 호객행위 ’를 처벌대상으로 삼고 있는데, ‘ 손님을 부르는’ 행위에는 ‘ 손님’, ‘ 고객님’, ‘ 아주머니’, ‘ 아저씨’ 등 손님을 직접적으로 부르는 것뿐만 아니라 물건의 판매를 목적으로 손님의 관심을 끌기 위하여 간접적으로 손님을 부르는 말( 이를 테면, ‘ 이리 오 세요’, ‘ 보고 가세요’, ‘ 쌉니다

(2) The Defendant, at the time of the instant case, expressed an excessive value of KRW 5,00,00 as well as KRW 2,000,000,00,000,00,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,00