beta
(영문) 광주지방법원 2018.11.21 2017고단4382

공갈

Text

Defendants are not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the Defendants is publicly announced.

Reasons

1. The summary of the facts charged is that Defendant A was a person who has been in charge of approximately 12 years from around 2003 to around 2015, and Defendant B was the head of the community youth around 2014.

From the standpoint of the construction company that should carry out the construction project when the Defendants claim damages to the village against the construction-related persons by finding the construction site, the Defendants thought that the Defendants would pay the Defendants the compensation for damage or the money for the village development fund to obtain permission for the construction project. The Defendants conspired to raise money in the name of compensation for damage by asserting that the said improvement project would be used for their personal purposes by claiming the damage from the management bank E to the effect that there was no damage to the village and by receiving the money in the name of the compensation for damage or the village development fund.

Defendant

A, around 10:00 on April 8, 2015, orders from the Cresung-gun F to the Cresung-gun F, and search for the case with Defendant B at the “D” site office in which the victim-based corporation participated, together with Defendant B, has caused damage to the village due to the suspension of construction work and the settlement of civil petitions by dust and noise.

Before several years, the city gas construction works and the noise-proof lawsuit in the village has been compensated for 23 million won on the wind to be heritageed.

This is the construction site located far away from the village, so it is 18 million won.

When continuing construction without hearing the horses, it threatens the village people to stop the construction site and put it into a civil petition with the Masro Gun Office without giving money.

However, despite the threat of the Defendants, the said G continued to perform construction without giving money, and around 15:00 on April 11, 2015, Defendant B prevented the access road to the said construction site by means of Bosch Rexroth, and “a civil petition is resolved and construction work is resolved.”