감염병의예방및관리에관한법률위반
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of two million won.
If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.
Punishment of the crime
The Minister of Health and Welfare, a Mayor/Do Governor, or the head of a Si/Gun/Gu shall take measures to prevent the spread of an infectious disease upon the outbreak of the infectious disease in an appropriate place for a specific period, and no person shall violate such measures.
On June 16, 2020, the Defendant received a written notice under the name of the head of the Gangnam-gu Public Health Center from June 16, 2020 to June 12:00, on the ground that the Defendant was a person of U.S. nationality who entered the Republic of Korea through the Incheon Airport and is an infectious disease victim.
Nevertheless, the Defendant, from June 29, 2020 to June 16:00 on the same day, went away from the above residence and went into the event before the above apartment building and violated the measures of isolation.
Summary of Evidence
1. Defendant's legal statement;
1. Reporting on an accusation, a written accusation, the occurrence of a person who has deserted permission, and the status of measures taken;
1. Notice of isolation and application of Acts and subordinate statutes governing receipt;
1. Article 79-3 of the Infectious Disease Control and Prevention Act applicable to the crimes and subparagraph 5 of Article 79-3 and subparagraph 3 of Article 47 of the Act on the Prevention and Control of Contagious Diseases According to the Selection of Penalties;
1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;
1. The crime of this case on the ground of sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order is deemed to have been committed despite the Defendant’s receipt of notice of isolation due to Corrona-19, and the crime’s nature is not less than that of the crime in light of social risk resulting from the violation of self-recoveration measures and social cost issues related thereto.
However, it shall be considered in favor of the defendant that the defendant has not realized the risk of the violation after receiving the voice judgment from Coina or 19 after the fact that the defendant has not realized the risk of the violation, and reflects the violation, and the frequency and time of the violation of the notice of isolation, the time and distance of the escape from the place of isolation, and the crime.