logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2020.06.19 2019노1575
업무방해등
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Regarding obstruction of business, misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles 1) The Defendant ordered sporady and ordered sporady, and the Defendant requested 10 minutes to spores to the store employees who do not spores, and the Defendant’s daily activities do not intentionally cover the Defendant’s business in the course of leading the Defendant, and did not leave the store at the request of the police officer dispatched later, and did not enter the store. Therefore, the Defendant did not interfere with the store business for one hour and thirty minutes, and the Defendant did not intentionally interfere with the business, and therefore, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged, which erred by misapprehending the legal principles, thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment. The Defendant did not know that his daily activities did not bring about spores, and the Defendant did not wish to find spores in a state where spores could not enter the store due to the police officer’s request for eviction, and thus, did not have reported spores, and did not want to do so.

Therefore, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment, which found Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (three million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) Determination on the assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles regarding interference with business (A) 'defluence in the relevant legal doctrine on interference with business' refers to all the forces capable of suppressing and mixing human free will (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2004Do8447, May 27, 2005). In establishing the crime of interference with business, it does not require any actual occurrence of interference with business, and there is a risk of causing interference with business.

arrow