(영문) 부산지방법원 2013.05.06 2012고정2969

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 부산지방법원 2013.05.06 2012고정2969

상해등

Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,000,000.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. Damage to property;

A. On June 28, 2011, the Defendant, on March 22, 2011, purchased the instant building with the wife of the Busan Eastdong-gu, Busan, to change the name of the building into “D building” and to operate the “E” from the first floor of the said building. On March 22, 2011, the Defendant instructed the victim G operating “F” on the leased 3th floor of the said building to remove the front floor signboard and banner attached to the outer wall of the said 5th floor and to attach the Defendant’s signboard.

On June 28, 2011, the Defendant: (a) removed two essential signboards installed on the front side and right side of the outer wall and one banner, and then destroyed the property owned by the victim equivalent to three million won at the market price, without agreement with the victim on the removal of the signboard; and (b) removed the two essential signboards installed on the front side and right side of the outer wall.

B. On September 201, 201, the Defendant destroyed the property owned by the victim, by having H, a lessee of the building at the end of the end of September 201, which was attached to the entrance glass of the first floor of the building, remove an advertisement screen of the said victim, and remove an advertisement board attached to the wall of the entrance, from which the market price cannot be determined.

2. Interference with business;

A. On June 28, 2011, the Defendant used the status of the owner of the instant building, and installed the Defendant’s business signboard on the right outer wall where the victim’s signboards and placards were removed at the time and place of the said paragraph, taking advantage of the victim’s status.

As a result, the defendant has undermined the effectiveness of the victim's essential advertising, thereby obstructing the victim's operation of the main source.

B. On September 201, the Defendant took advantage of the status of the owner of the instant building, and caused the said H to remove the victim’s essential KRW 1(b) date, time, place, and the Acryp advertising board, and attached an advertising set and an Acryp advertising board which is reduced to 1/2 size rather than the existing one.

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 2015.04.23 2015고정581

-서울중앙지방법원 2016.12.13 2016고정1154

-서울중앙지방법원 2016.08.10 2015가단152685

-서울서부지방법원 2016.03.25 2015가단27975

-부산지방법원 2019.10.10 2018나61093