(영문) 인천지방법원 2019.01.31 2018노4220 | 리걸엔진

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) 인천지방법원 2019.01.31 2018노4220

업무방해등

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant committed each of the crimes in this case under the state of mental and physical disability, such as under the influence of alcohol at the time.

B. The sentence imposed by the court below (10 months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the record as to the claim of mental disability, it does not seem that the defendant had the ability to discern things or make decisions at the time of each of the crimes in this case, even though he was found to have been under the influence of alcohol at the time of the crime of interference with business among the crimes in this case, in light of the following circumstances, such as the course and process of each of the crimes in this case, and the behavior of the defendant before and after

Therefore, this part of the defendant's argument is without merit.

B. It is recognized that the Defendant recognized each of the instant crimes as to the assertion of unfair sentencing, and against his mistake, and that the amount of damage to the instant larceny is relatively small.

However, the crime of interference with the business of this case is a case where the defendant repeatedly found the main points operated by the victim C on the day of the case and repeatedly obstructed the business of the above victim, such as avoiding disturbance, and thus, the nature of the crime is not good in light of the background and method of the crime, etc. Furthermore, the defendant committed the crime of theft of the victim's property by intrusion upon the victim E without being aware of the investigation by the investigative agency about the above crime, even though he was investigated by the investigation agency, and committed the crime, up to the trial, the victim and the victim did not agree with the victim, and did not recover from damage, and committed the crime of interference with the business of this case even though he was sentenced to criminal punishment for the crime of interference with the business, and even during the period of the repeated crime, he committed the crime of interference with the business of this case, regardless of the fact that there was no special change of circumstances newly considered after the sentence of the judgment of the court below, and there is the age, character

유사 판례

-서울고등법원 2020.11.19 2020노1447

-서울북부지방법원 2019.08.16 2019노854

-서울남부지방법원 2016.12.23 2016노1912

-창원지방법원 2015.10.08 2015노660

-서울북부지방법원 2019.07.26 2019노663