업무방해등
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of 1.5 million won.
The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.
The court below convicted all of the facts charged in this case, and appealed on the grounds of mistake of facts, misunderstanding of legal principles, and misunderstanding of sentencing.
The trial before the remand rejected all the arguments of the defendant and dismissed the defendant's appeal.
On this issue, the Defendant appealed.
The Supreme Court rendered a judgment prior to the remanding of the instant facts charged, which found the Defendant guilty on the obstruction of business and injury, that the Defendant did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal principles on the establishment of obstruction of business and the relation of the use of forged official document among the facts charged in the instant case. The lower court erred by misapprehending the legal principles on the objects and standards of determining the forgery of official document under Article 225 of the Criminal Act, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.
The decision was determined.
B. A. Of the judgment of the court of first instance before remanding, the part of the judgment should be reversed on the forgery of official documents and the use of forged official documents. Since this part and the remaining guilty part are concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, a single sentence should be sentenced. Therefore, the judgment of the court prior to remand is reversed and remanded to this court.
The final binding force of the judgment reversed and the part rejected in the final appeal on the grounds that the grounds of appeal are groundless in the scope of the judgment rendered by the court of final appeal shall be deemed to have become final and conclusive at the same time as the judgment rendered by the court, and the court that received the return shall not make any judgment contrary thereto. This is nothing more than that of the court that received the return, even if the court that received the return on the criminal facts that have become final and conclusive, does not mean the examination of evidence (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2011Do8478, Oct. 13, 2011). Of the facts charged in the instant case, among the judgment rendered by the court prior to