업무방해등
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of three million won.
The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is unreasonable because the penalty (three million won of a fine) declared by the court below is too unhued.
2. We examine ex officio prior to the prosecutor’s judgment on the allegation of unfair sentencing.
According to evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below, the defendant interfered with the victim D's restaurant business by means of assault against the victim F in the judgment of the court below and does not seem to interfere with the above restaurant business by any other means. Thus, the single act of assault by the defendant constitutes a case where the crime of assault and the crime of interference with business meet the elements of
Therefore, both crimes should be deemed to be in a mutually competitive relationship.
(2) The lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the number of the crimes of assault and the crime of interference with business, and thereby applying the law. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the number of crimes of assault and the crime of interference with business, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.
This is an illegal act that affected the judgment.
3. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below against the defendant is reversed in accordance with Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the prosecutor's grounds for appeal, and it is again decided as follows.
Criminal facts
The summary of the facts charged and the summary of the evidence recognized by the court are the same as the corresponding columns of the judgment below, and thus, they are quoted in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.
Application of Statutes
1. Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act and Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense;
1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Concurrent Crimes;
1. Selection of an alternative fine for punishment;
1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;
1. The reason for sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the provisional payment order is a restaurant where the Defendant did not have any error.