Injury, etc.)

(b) Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act;

(c) Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act;

(d) Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (Habitually collective or chest);

Light property damage, etc.

(e) Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act;

(f) Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act;

(g) Fraud;

(h) Interference with business;

(i) Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act;

(j) Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act;

(k) Injury;

2.(h)(j).

Defendant A’s failure to pay the above fine, the period calculated by converting KRW 100,000 into one day;

shall be confined in a workhouse.

However, with respect to Defendant B, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for three years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Defendant B shall be subject to probation and shall be ordered to provide community service for 120 hours.

Criminal facts

【Criminal Power】

Defendant A sentenced 30,00 won to the punishment for a violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act at the Chuncheon District Court on December 16, 1993; 30,000 won to the punishment for a violation of the same Act; on November 15, 2000, 1 year and June of the suspension of execution to the same court; 5,00,000 won to the fine for an injury at the same court on June 10, 202; and on December 17, 2002, 3 years of imprisonment for a violation of the Punishment of Violence, etc. Act at the same court on July 25, 2008; and on August 29, 201, Defendant A sentenced Defendant A to imprisonment with prison labor for a violation of the Punishment of Violence, etc. Act (a collective weapon, deadly weapon, etc.), with prison labor for a violation of the same Act on August 29, 201.

【Criminal Facts】

1. The sole criminal conduct of Defendant A;

(a) Collaboration from April 18, 2013 to March 5, 2014;

At around 23:00 on April 18, 2013, the Defendant: (a) 23:00, the victim E (n.e., 56 years old); (b) the victim E (n.e., the victim E (n., the victim 56 years old); and (c) 5 years of working together with one employee; and (d) the victim 8, G, H, and so on without any justifiable reason after drinking alcohol; and (c) the victim scamscamscamscamscamscamscamscamscamscamscamscamscamscamscamscamscamscamscamscamscamscamscamscamscamscamscamscamscamscamscamscamscamscamscamscamscamscamscamscamscamscamscamscamscamscamscams, etc.

(b) Fraud from August 21, 2013 to March 17, 2014;

On August 21, 2013, at around 21:30 on August 21, 2013, the Defendant stated, “F” at the main point of “F” as stated in the paragraph (a), that the Defendant was required to pay the alcohol value from the victim E after being mixed with a mixed person and being provided with alcohol and alcohol. However, even if the Defendant was provided with alcohol and alcohol at the time, the Defendant did not have any intention or ability to pay the alcohol value to the victim.

The Defendant, as above, by deceiving the victim and receiving a total of KRW 120,00,00 from the victim, from the time of receiving the alcohol and the share of KRW 120,00,00 from the victim, until March 17, 2014, acquired the victim E, I, G, and H a total of 10 times in the same manner as the victim E, I, G, and H by the aforesaid similar method, as shown in the attached crime list.

(c) Violence to patrolmen on August 2013.

On August 8, 2013, the Defendant: L/W, in the Jincheon-gun of the J of the Sucheon-gun of the Republic of Korea on which it is impossible to find out of the street without any reason in front of the convenience store, and his male-friendly son, saying, “A victim M(V, 39 years of age) who flicked the trade name in the neighborhood, who flicked the victim’s face on the ground that the Defendant flicked the victim’s face with the word “I would like to flick it?” on the ground that the Defendant flicked the victim’s face on the top of the back, who flicked the victim’s face at once, and flicked the victim’s face with a large way to attract the flick, and flick the victim’s face with another hand.

D. Injury on August 30, 2013

On August 30, 2013, at around 00:30, the Defendant, at the main point of “F” as indicated in paragraph (a), suffered bodily injury, such as corrosion and blood transfusion, etc., of the snow boom for about 14 days, by breaking the victim’s face on two occasions due to a small-scale dispute between the victim N(39 years of age) and the 5-studio while drinking in the room.

(e) Business obstruction and assault on August 30, 2013;

피고인은 2013 . 8. 30, 02:50경 강원 화천군 이에 있는 피해자 P 운영의 'Q' 편 의점에서 그곳 종업원인 피해자 R( 여, 40세)에게 외상을 요구하였는데 이를 거부당하 자 피해자 R에게 " 이 씨팔년아, 네 제부, 애비 , 경찰에 신고해봐 안 무섭다, 못생긴 년 , 좆나 뚱뚱한 년 "이라고 욕설을 하고, 냉장고 안에 들어있던 캔맥주 및 병맥주 수십 개 를 꺼내 카운터 위에 놓고 캔맥주를 바닥에 던지는 등으로 약 1시간에 걸쳐 소란을 피 우는 방법으로 위력을 사용하여 피해자 P의 편의점 영업을 방해하고 , 계산하지 않은 술을 가지고 나가는 것을 제지하는 피해자 R의 얼굴 부위을 오른손바닥으로 때려 폭 행하였다.

(f) Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act on November 19, 2013 (the destruction and damage of group, deadly weapons, etc.)

At around 14:50 on November 19, 2013, the Defendant: (a) laid down a restaurant in front of the ‘T' restaurant located in Gangwon-gun S, Gangwon-do; (b) and (c) laid down the restaurant in front of the Defendant’s birth with V, which is the Defendant’s birth; (d) but (e) discovered that the entrance was locked, and destroyed the entrance door of the victim’s restaurant in excess of approximately 50,000 won at the market price.

(g) interference with business on November 21, 2013;

On December 21, 2013, at around 01:50, the Defendant ordered a victim X operation in the Gangwon-gun 0, Gangwon-gun 0, the Defendant obstructed the victim’s food party operation by using force, such as making an order to the employee Z, and making a bath to the customers whose name was eating at the same place cannot be known, without any justifiable reason, and leaving the Defendant’s order, she throw away the victim’s food party operation as “the head of the party Y,” by leaving the victim’s food party operation on the teb, with the Defendant’s order.

(h) Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a collective injury, deadly weapons, etc.) on December 1, 2013

On December 1, 2013, at around 02:25, the Defendant collected the 'AB main store located in Gangwoncheon-gun AA' and 'AB main store located in Gangwoncheon-gun A', where the Defendant c (n, 29 years of age) smelled tobacco while smoking tobacco, and opened the entrance to the business owner of the said establishment, and changed the entrance, and if the Defendant did not want to smoke, it means that the Defendant “if he does not drink, she will drink until she will drink after going from the house and drink until she would drink.” The Defendant collected the vexator, a dangerous object in the surrounding area, and caused the victim to respond to it, thereby causing the victim to be able to take medical treatment for about 14 days, thereby causing damage to the character of head and other parts, which require treatment between 14 days, and causing the victim to do so.

(i) Magion on February 25, 2014

At around 05:50 on February 25, 2014, the Defendant: at around 23:00 on the street in front of “AD” located in AE at around 23:00 on the street, the Defendant reported that he was able to return home to the victim AG (n, 25 years of age) who is an employee of the said main shop after drinking alcohol with three and three employees, and left the head of the said Tong to whom he intends to do so. The Defendant sought a sexual traffic (referring to "the second word"), but the Defendant refused it from the victim, and the victim was able to do so one time at one time at one time at the left neck of the victim's floor, and the victim was frighted to do so for the same year, and the victim was not able to do so.

Accordingly, the Defendant received 150,000 won from the victim who was frightened with the victim's hand, with the victim's hand at 3 times, and frighted with the victim's head debt, and frighted with the victim's hand, and frighted with the victim's head debt, "the same year is close to giving money, and all received money." The Defendant received 150,000 won from the victim who was frightened with G, the owner of the above main shop.

On March 16, 2014

At around 09:00 on March 16, 2014, the Defendant shown the paper that stated a site inspection for the victim H (e.g., 41 years old) who operates the "AJ" point in AI at the "AH" located in 0, Seocheoncheon-gun, Gangwon-do, and, at the same time, he was found not guilty of the instant case (the following paragraph 2). The Defendant, “AK, who resolved the instant case, was flicked with the main flick, was trying to flick with the main flick, flick flick, flick, and flicked with the main flick, flick, and flicked with the main flick, flick, flick, and flicked with the funeral, and flickly, it would be impossible for the Defendant to engage in any business to feel from the victim.”

2. Defendants’ co-principal conduct

(a) Injury;

On March 5, 2014, at around 01:45, the Defendants jointly 01:45 at the main point of “A”, the said main point of “A,” and the Defendants were refused to do so. Defendant A is a criminal charge against the victim AL (the age of 49) who drinks mixedly in one’s own room, “I will report. I will report.” In order to do so, I will see the victim’s head and side fright, etc., of the victim’s ice, and fright to sit on the floor when the victim’s ice and side fright are moved out of the room without any justifiable reason. Defendant B, in combination, did so, with the victim’s ice and side fright; Defendant B, “I flish, flish, flish, flish,” and blish the victim’s body and side flish at the victim’s own room. When the victim’s body and flish at the victim’s own body, etc.

(b) Violence;

피고인들은 공동하여, 위 가항 기재 일시경 위와 같이 AL를 폭행하는 피고인들 을 말리던 피해자 AM( 여, 32세) 이 112신고를 하기 위하여 휴대폰을 들고 밖으로 나가 려 하자, 이를 본 피고인 A은 "쟤 잡아"라고 소리를 지르고, 이에 피고인 B는 위 피해 자를 쫓아가 옷을 붙잡고, 피고인 A은 이에 합세하여 손으로 피해자의 머리카락을 움 켜쥐고 잡아당겨 피해자를 폭행하였다.

(c) Interference with business;

At around 01:00 on the same day, the Defendants conspired with the victim H, the main owner of the above "AJ", "AJ", and the victim stated "Is no Is Is Is Is Is Is Is Is Is Is Is Is Is Is Is Is Is Is Is Is." It threatens the victim that "Is I will not be able to engage in funeral services for this State and Isn restaurant operated by the husband of Is. I will be able to prevent funeral services from being performed on the floor of the Ismcheon, I would like to prevent the funeral services from being performed on the floor of the Ismcheon." The Defendants interfered with the victim's main business services over about 45 minutes by force, such as AL and AM, which had performed alcohol at the above main point.

"2014, 43

Defendant A, at around 10:25 on June 13, 2013, 10:25, 'AO' fishing place operated by Defendant A, a victim, who was a victim of AP, was in the above place, with N and thereby obstructed Defendant A’s fishing place operation by avoiding disturbance. When the victim’s shoulder part of the victim, who was in a fighting match, was fighting with the victim, she saw Balgora, and she sawd the victim with approximately two weeks of medical treatment.

Summary of Evidence

2014 Gohap42

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Each legal statement of the witness H, AG, AL, AM, AK, Z, P, R, and AC;

1. Each prosecutor's interrogation protocol against the Defendants

1. Each prosecutor's statement of H and AL;

1. Each police statement on H, AM, AG, K, G, I, E, Z, W, M, N, P, R, AC, and R;

1. Each injury diagnosis letter;

1. Photographs explanation;

1. Criminal records as indicated in the judgment: Criminal history records (defendant A), investigation reports (verification of criminal records of the same kind as a suspect);

Confirmation of the date of release from repeated crime, etc.

"2014, 43"

1. Defendant A’s legal statement

1. Statement by the prosecution against AP;

1. A medical certificate;

Application of Statutes

1. Article relevant to the facts constituting an offense and the selection of punishment;

A. Defendant A

Article 2(3) and (1)3 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, Article 350 of the Criminal Act

1) Paragraph 1 (Habitual Violence) of this Article, Article 347(1) of each Criminal Code (the fraud point, the choice of imprisonment with labor), each violence.

Article 2(3) and (1)1 of the Punishment of Acts, etc. Act, Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act

Article 2 (3) and (1) 3 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, and punishment under Article 2 (1) 3 of the Punishment of Violences, etc.

Article 257(1) of the Act (the point of habitual injury) and Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act (the date of August 30, 2013); and

Act on the Punishment of Violence, Etc., shall apply to interference with the business of November 21, 2013, imprisonment with labor), and Punishment of Violences, etc.

Article 3 (4) and (1) and Article 2 (1) 1 of the Criminal Act, and Article 366 of the Criminal Act.

Articles 3(4) and (1), and 2(1)3 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act

Heading, Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act (the point of habitual group, deadly weapon, etc.), and punishment of violence, etc.

Article 2(3) and (1)1 of the Act, Article 283(1) of the Criminal Act (a) of the Criminal Act, Article 2(3) and (1) of the Criminal Act

Articles 314(1), 30 (Interference with the business of March 5, 2014) and Article 257 of the Criminal Act

Paragraph 1 (the point of injury and the choice of fines)

B. Defendant B

Article 2(2) and (1)3 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act and Article 257(1) of the Criminal Act

Article 2(2) and 1 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (the point of joint injury, the choice of imprisonment)

Paragraph 1 of Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of joint violence, the choice of imprisonment), Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act

section 30 of the Criminal Act, section 30 (Interference with business, choice of imprisonment)

1. Aggravation of repeated crimes (Defendant A);

Article 35 [Exclusion of Bodily Injury, Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (Habitual Group, Deadly Bodily Injury), and Bodily Injury] of the Criminal Act

Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (Habitual Injury) and each violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (Habitual injury)

A crime, violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (Habitual Group, Deadly Weapons, etc.) and each act of violence, etc.

Abandon against a violation of the Punishment Act (Habitual Violence) or a violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (Habitual Intimidation).

section 42 of the Criminal Code, to the extent of the limitation

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

A. Defendant A

The former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2 and 3, Article 50, and the proviso to Article 42 of the Criminal Act

Punishment of Violence, etc. Act with the largest punishment for all other crimes except for the remaining crimes;

Imprisonment with prison labor and injury committed during the period of concurrent crimes resulting from a crime of insurrection (Habitually Injury by Deadly Weapons, etc.)

[Concurrent Imposition of Fines]

B. Defendant B

Article 37 (former part), Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act

Punishment Act (Joint Injury) shall apply to concurrent crimes resulting from a violation of the Punishment Act

1. Detention in a workhouse (Defendant A);

Articles 70 and 69(2) of the Criminal Act

1. Suspension of execution (Defendant B);

Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act

1. Probation and community service order (Defendant B);

Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act

Judgment on the Defendants and defense counsel's assertion

1. Summary of the assertion

A. Defendant A

With respect to paragraph 1(e) of the judgment No. 2014 high-priced 42 (hereinafter the same shall apply), there is no doubt that the victim R would take a bath or had a caner beer on the floor, and there is no fact that the victim X would take a bath to the customers in the restaurant operated by the victim X, or would not interfere with the business of the victim B, such as the subsequent son. In relation to paragraph (h) of the judgment No. 1, there was no fact that the metal would have been collected or the metal would have been collected, and there was no fact that the victim AC did not take a bath to the victim AG in relation to paragraph (1) of the judgment, and there was no fact that the victim gave a bath to the victim AG in relation to paragraph (1) of the judgment No. 1 of the judgment, and there was no fact that there was no threat to the victim H by speaking to the victim AK in relation to paragraph (1).

B. Defendants

With regard to Paragraph 2 of the judgment, Defendant A was in line with the victim AL’s head, and did not look at the victim. Defendant B only fighting the victim, and Defendant B was in line with the victim’s clothes. Although Defendant B was in line with the victim AM’s clothes, there was no fact that Defendant B was in line with the victim’s head, and the Defendants did not interfere with the victim’s main business.

2. Determination

A. As to Defendant A’s assertion

According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court, as described in paragraph (e) of the judgment of the court below, Defendant A, as the convenience store for the operation of the victim PP, was rejected, she saw the victim R to take a bath, was placed on the caner floor, was put on the beer floor, and obstructed the business by making the victim A, who was a customer of the main point in the judgment of the court as described in paragraph (h) of the judgment of the court below. If the victim A, as described in paragraph (1) of the judgment of the court below, had the victim A, who was a customer of the main point in the judgment of the court, had the victim A, as stated in Paragraph (h) of the judgment, had the victim A, who was the employee of the main point in the judgment of the court, requested commercial sex acts but refused commercial sex acts, and caused the victim to feel the victim's 150,000 won, and if the victim, as described in paragraph (1) of the judgment, had the victim H feel promulgated the facts as stated in the judgment.

B. As to the Defendants’ assertion

"When two or more persons jointly commit the crime of injury or assault" under Article 2 (2) of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act refers to the requirement that there exists a so-called accomplice relationship among them, and where several persons are aware of the crime of another person in the same opportunity at the same place, and commit the crime using this. However, in co-offender relationship, there is a combination of two or more persons' intent to jointly process and realize the crime. Thus, such recognition and use does not necessarily need to be formed before the crime is committed, and even if there is no common intention to jointly commit the injury or assault, if the two or more persons are aware of the fact that they did not have to be accompanied by the act of injury or assault, and have been directly involved in the act of assault or assault, or have been engaged in the act of assault or assault with the view of showing the situation of other persons' injury or assault, etc., it constitutes a crime of assault or assault in order or conspiracy (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 200Do3250, Feb. 19, 1992).

According to the evidence duly adopted and duly examined by the court, since the defendants were refused to do so to the victim He, the main business owner of the plaintiff Eul, the defendant was able to do so, and the defendant was able to do so, and the defendant was able to do so, and the victim AL faces the face and the side of the victim who was the main business owner, and the defendant B also took the body of the victim AL when she took the body of the victim AL. The defendant B puts clothes of the victim AM who was her main place to 112 report her fighting and her her head, and the defendant A her she was fright to do so. In addition to the above facts, each of the above facts acknowledged can be seen as a crime of assault or assault by the victim under Article 2 (2) of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, or a crime of assault or assault by the victim's joint customers as stated in its reasoning.

Therefore, all defendants and defense counsel's arguments are rejected.

Reasons for sentencing

[Defendant A]

1. Scope of applicable sentences under law: Five years to fifty years (the remainder of the crimes except for the injury) of imprisonment;

Fine not exceeding 10,00,000 won (with respect to the crime of injury)

2. The scope of recommending sentencing criteria for crimes subject to the sentencing criteria;

(a) Crimes of violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (Habitual violence): Four years to seven years; and

[Determination of Punishment] Habitual Assaults, Conspiracys for Cumulative Offense, Assaults, Special Assaults

[Recommendation Area] Aggravation (Aggravated Elements of Special Aggravations: Subject to unspecified or large number of victims

(2) If a person commits repeatedly during a reasonable period of time;

(b) Offenses of violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (Habitually Bodily Bodily Injury): Three years to five years.

[Determination of Punishment] Special Bodily Injury resulting from Habitual Injury or Bodi Bodily Injury to a Habitual Crime

【Recommendation Area】 Basic Area

(c) Offenses of violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act: Two years to four years.

[Determination of Punishment] Bodily Injury resulting from Habitual Injury, Bodily Injury resulting from Cumulative Offense

【Recommendation Area】

(d) Each fraud: Imprisonment with prison labor for up to one year and six months;

[Determination of Punishment] General Fraud (less than KRW 100,00)

【Recommendation Area】

(e) Crimes of violating the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act: Imprisonment with prison labor for not less than six months nor more than one year and six months.

[Determination of Punishment] Special Intimidation of Habitual and Cumulative Crimes

【Recommendation Area】

(f) Crimes of violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (Habitual Violence): Six months to one year; and

[Determination of Punishment] Crimes of Violence and Special Violence

【Recommendation Area】

(g) Handling multiple crimes: Imprisonment with prison labor for not less than four years;

Each of the above crimes to which the sentencing guidelines apply and the sentencing guidelines have not been set or applied;

crime [Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (Habitual Group, Deadly Weapons, etc.)] and each duty

Since the crime of interference and injury is a concurrent crime under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Code, the sentencing guidelines are based on the theory.

The lower limit of the recommendations for each of the above crimes shall govern.

3. Determination of sentence: Imprisonment with prison labor for not less than six years and a fine not exceeding 1,00,000 won;

Defendant A had been provided with food and alcoholic beverages to local residents repeatedly but did not pay the price, and during that process, the Defendant was punished corresponding to the crime of this case in light of the following facts: (a) employees and customers are injured; (b) the nature of the crime of this case, which interfered with duties and damaged property by bathing and intimidation; (c) the possibility of criticism is heavy; (d) the residents suffered from the crime of this case are likely to suffer property damage, physical and mental damage; (b) the Defendant was punished several times as violent crimes; and (c) the Defendant committed the crime of this case without being aware of it during the repeated period.

However, the defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 3,00,00 as a result of the defendant's injury in the case of the victim E, I, W, and N, and the above victims were not punished for the defendant. The defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 3,00,00 as a result of the defendant's request for formal trial. Accordingly, the defendant was unable to be sentenced to a more severe punishment than the above fine upon receiving a request for formal trial. Other circumstances, such as the motive and background of the crime of this case, the defendant's age, character and conduct, family relation, criminal records, circumstances after the crime, and statutory punishment, shall be determined by the same sentence as the order, taking into account the various circumstances, which are the conditions for the punishment specified in

[Defendant B]

1. Scope of applicable sentences under law: Imprisonment with prison labor for one month to September 15;

2. The scope of recommending sentencing criteria for offenses to which the sentencing criteria apply;

(a) Offenses of violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act: Imprisonment with prison labor for up to four months from one year and six months;

[Determination of Punishment] General Bodily Injury to Violence Offenses

[Recommendation Area] Basic Field (Aggravated Elements of General Convicts: Cases where at least two persons jointly commit a crime)

(b) Crimes of violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act: Imprisonment with prison labor for not less than two months nor more than ten months;

[Determination of Punishment] Violence Crimes

[Recommendation Area] Basic Field (In the case of crimes jointly committed by two or more persons, the factors of aggravation of general persons):

(c) Handling of multiple crimes: Imprisonment with prison labor for not less than four months;

The above crimes subject to the sentencing guidelines and the crime of interference with business for which no sentencing guidelines are set;

Since each crime is in a concurrent relationship under the former part of Article 37 of the Act, each crime for which the sentencing guidelines are set.

The lower limit of the recommendations shall prevail.

3. Determination of sentence: Two years of imprisonment and three years of suspended sentence;

Defendant B, along with Defendant A, assaulted two victims at the main point of the operation of the Victim H, thereby causing injury to one victim, and interfered with the main business of the victim. The punishment like the order shall be determined by taking into account various circumstances, such as the nature of the crime, the degree of damage inflicted by the victims, the degree of the type of crime exercised by the victims, and the motive and background of the crime in this case, the age, character and conduct, family relation, criminal records, the circumstances after the crime, and the statutory penalty.

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.

Ethical police officer

Ise Jina

(Elimination of Crime List)