logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 전주지방법원 2013.06.12 2013고정230
업무방해
Text

Defendant

A KRW 2 million, Defendant B was punished by a fine of KRW 200,000,000, Defendant C was punished by a fine of KRW 400,00,00, and Defendant D.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The defendants are bus articles belonging to FF Co., Ltd., and labor union members belonging to the NFF branches F of the GFF branch of the public transportation union bus union.

From March 13, 2012, the Defendants and the labor union members affiliated with the G Trade Union engaged in the intra-city bus sales business belonging to the former branch of the bus headquarters for public transportation of the G Trade Union, and accordingly, the Defendants and the company engaged in a partial lock-out from March 20, 2012.

Accordingly, the defendants did not receive wages, while the bus officers who did not participate in the strike did not appear to have the effect of the strike due to the normal operation of the bus, and the bus officers who did not participate in the strike did not have the effect of the strike and did not raise objections against the bus officers and the company in normal operation.

1. Defendant C, at around 12:10 on April 11, 2012, entered the F Co., Ltd. office located in Seojin-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, and had a conversation between the victim I and the executive director of the said company, who had been located in the said office, and had expressed the victim’s desire to take part in the said office several times, and did not leave the said office for about 45 minutes.

As a result, the defendant leaves the victim without justifiable reasons.

The government refused to the Gu and interfere with the victim's business affairs by force.

2. On April 13, 2012, from around 05:30 to around 07:00, Defendant A expressed that “I am out of the bus parking lot exit for the aforementioned victim FFF corporation, and, in the surrounding areas, there was no employee of a group of union members who works in the same manner as the Defendant, during the industrial action, employed a substitute that was prohibited in order to perform the duties suspended due to the industrial action. However, the victim company confirmed illegal substitute personnel while entering the industrial action, and used a microphone and went out without participating in the strike, and expressed to the drivers of the bus to “I am, I am, I am, I am you am you am you am we am we am we am we am we am we am we am we am we am we am we am we am we can see.”

arrow