beta
(영문) 울산지방법원 2020.11.12 2019노1372

업무방해등

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant 2,00,000 won for each of the crimes in the 2017 High Court Decision 201Da1223.

Reasons

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

A. There is no fact that the defendant interfered with the business of the victim C or damaged the property, and there is no fact that the victim C and E were assaulted.

(2017 Highly 1223). The Defendant did not inflict any injury upon the Victim H.

(2019, fixed39). (b)

The sentence of the court below on unreasonable sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Ex officio determination

A. According to the records, the following circumstances are revealed.

1) Although the Defendant was notified by the court of the lower court that he will examine the witness of C, E, and H on the 9th trial date on the 8th trial date of the lower court, he was absent from the 9th trial date without justifiable grounds, and the witness C and E were present at the 9th trial date. The lower court postponed the 9th trial date and completed the examination of the witness of C, E, as an examination outside the trial date, without justifiable grounds. 2) The Defendant was absent from the 10th trial date without justifiable grounds, while the witness H was present at the 10th trial date, but the examination of the witness was not conducted as an examination outside the trial date. The lower court postponed the

3) As the Defendant was absent again on the 11st trial date of the lower court, the lower court revised the instant charges without the Defendant’s appearance pursuant to Articles 458(2) and 365 of the Criminal Procedure Act. The lower court, due to the Defendant’s absence, failed to conduct documentary evidence investigation as to each witness C and E, and the witness examination as to H was concluded on the said trial date and rendered a judgment. (4) The lower court determined that the remainder of the adopted evidence except for the statement of the victims was guilty.

B. However, the lower court’s determination is difficult to accept for the following reasons.

Among the evidence of conviction cited by the court below, the documents prepared by the police, such as criminal reports, occurrence reports, internal investigation reports, and investigation reports.