[예배방해][미간행]
In a case where a pastor, who was sentenced to the dismissal from his religious order from his religious office, left the religious order with some believerss and without any notification or notice, entered the previous church worship which was prepared for the worship of the restoration, and was demanded by the members of the previous church to divide the worship, but he continued to refuse to reject the request, the case holding that the acts of the above pastors and believerss cannot be deemed to be an "culture" protected by the obstruction of the worship under Article 158 of the Criminal Act, since they interfere with the worship of the members of the previous church.
Article 158 of the Criminal Act
Defendant 1 and two others
Prosecutor
Law Firm Appellant et al.
Seoul Northern District Court Decision 2005No1148 Decided June 22, 2006
All appeals are dismissed.
We examine the grounds of appeal.
Interference with worship as stipulated in Article 158 of the Criminal Code is the peace of religious life and religious appraisal of the public as its legal interest.
However, the following circumstances revealed by the evidence of the first instance court admitted by the court below, i.e., the Nonindicted Party, who belongs to the Korea War Veterans Association (name omitted) church, passed a resolution to leave the religious order with some believers who were judged by the Seoul War Veterans Association's Department to leave the religious order, and (name omitted) on December 1, 2000, the case did not open (name omitted) at the building of the Korea War Veterans' Association until April 20, 203, and (name omitted) at the Korea War Veterans' Association, it is difficult to view that the Defendants were forced to leave the military order on April 11, 200, but it is difficult to view that the acts of the Defendant, including the Nonindicted Party, were interfered with the above acts of the members of the Korea War's Association without notice or advance notice, and that the Defendants did not follow the above acts of the Defendant's new correction (including the above acts of the members of the Korea War's own will omitted.
Although there are some appropriate points in the judgment of the court below, the judgment of the court below that the worship of the Nonindicted Party and his subordinate believers does not constitute a "e.g.," which is protected in the crime of obstruction of worship is just, and there is no error of law by misunderstanding the legal principles that affected the conclusion of the judgment as otherwise alleged in the ground of appeal
In addition, as long as the above determination by the court below is just, the part that the part that the defendants' act did not constitute a crime because the defendants' act constitutes a justifiable act under Article 20 of the Criminal Act even though the act of the non-indicted, etc. additionally constitutes "for example" protected by the crime of obstruction of worship is not affected by the conclusion as a assumptive judgment, and therefore, the ground of appeal against
Therefore, all appeals are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.
Justices Yang Sung-tae (Presiding Justice)