업무방해등
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendant
A shall be punished by a fine of KRW 700,000.
Defendant
The sentence against B shall be pronounced.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles (1) Defendant A was found in the “F clothes” store operated by the victim E (hereinafter “instant store”). However, there was no significant fluorial fact that the victim was “the removal of the same thing, the alteration of the morale, and the drinking house”, and there was no fact that the victim did not have any disturbance, such as gathering a liquid book within the store, and there was no fact that the customer did not enter, and there was no fact that the customer did not interfere with the victim’s business by force.
(2) The Defendants violated the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (the Defendants) recognize the fact that the Defendants jointly committed the victim. However, even if the victim did not have been injured and the victim sustained the injury, there is no causal relationship between the Defendants’ assault and the injury of the victim.
B. The sentence imposed by the court below (defendant A: fine of 2 million won, and fine of 500,000 won) is too unreasonable.
2. The judgment ex officio (Defendant B) prior to the judgment on Defendant B’s assertion, the record reveals that the Defendant received a suspended sentence of fine of KRW 300,000,000 from this court on June 13, 2012, and the above judgment became final and conclusive on June 21, 2012. As such, the crime for which judgment became final and conclusive and the crime at the time of original judgment are concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, with regard to the crime of concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act, and after examining whether to reduce or exempt the sentence, the part of Defendant B among the judgment below is no longer maintained.
However, even though there is a ground for ex officio reversal, Defendant B's assertion of mistake or misunderstanding of legal principles is still subject to a trial at the court.
3. Determination on the grounds for appeal
A. Judgment on the argument about obstruction of business (Defendant A).