권리행사방해등
Defendant
The sentence of sentence against A shall be suspended.
Defendant
Of the facts charged against A, the entry of buildings into the prosecution.
At around 09:20 on September 19, 2015, Defendant A damaged property equivalent to KRW 24,000 in total by intrusioning into a “F” warehouse owned by the victim E at D location at D on September 19, 2015, and destroying three locks owned by the victim, installed in the entrance and warehouse 2 operation, with a hacksaw.
Summary of Evidence
1. Defendant's legal statement;
1. Legal statement of witness E;
1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to field photographs, site photographs, and damaged objects;
1. Relevant Article 366 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense and Article 366 of the Selection of Punishment;
1. Article 59(1) of the Criminal Act (Article 59(1) of the suspended sentence of punishment (Article 300,000 won per day for detention in the workhouse), [Article 59(1) of the Criminal Act (Article 300,000 won of a fine and KRW 100,000 per day for detention in the workhouses] (Article 59(1) of the suspended sentence of punishment is a crime committed by the victim with the lock while the victim leased the warehouse to the defendant without lawful delivery following the termination of the lease, and taking into account the fact that the lock value is relatively minor and the defendant recognizes his mistake
1. The summary of the facts charged is that Defendant A is a person who, as the representative of (ju)G, keeps a winder in the victim E's warehouse, and Defendant B is the pro-friendly type of A.
At around 09:20 on September 19, 2015, the Defendants conspired to intrude into the above structure without the consent of the victim, by making use of the gaps in order to bring about a frightter owned by the Defendant A in custody in the warehouse from the “F” warehouse owned by the victim E located in the Pakistan, and by making use of the gaps in which there is no victim.
B. The Defendants’ obstruction of the exercise of rights are above.
Intrusion into the warehouse of the victim and brought about a considerable of 700 hot-waters (3.5 million won at the market price; hereinafter referred to as “instant hot-waters”) owned by the Defendant A, which are kept in the storage of the victim.
As a result, the Defendants conspired to exercise their rights against the upright of the victim's possession.