(영문) 청주지방법원 2018.08.24 2018노352 | 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) 청주지방법원 2018.08.24 2018노352

업무방해

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Fact-misunderstanding ① “E” (hereinafter “E”) is registered under the name of the Defendant, and the victim merely took charge of the burial, etc. according to the employment contract with the Defendant. As such, the operation of the store in this case cannot be deemed as the victim’s business.

② The Defendant and the victim reserved the right to terminate the agreement under the joint business contract stating that “if it causes losses within the scope prescribed by Act, it may be demanded to terminate the contract, whichever is whatever,” and as long as the grounds for termination occurred due to the victim’s act, and the Defendant legitimately exercised the right to terminate the agreement on June 30, 2017, it cannot be deemed that the victim obstructs his/her business even if he/she subsequently exercised the right

③ In addition, since the victim took place prior to the Defendant’s act and expressed his/her intention to refuse to perform a contract which is final and conclusive, the Defendant had not lawfully harmed the contract with the victim on June 30, 2017, even though there was no separate measure.

must be viewed.

④ In light of all the circumstances, when the victim prevented him from entering the burial of this case, the victim clearly did not have the intent and ability to operate the burial of this case.

It appears that the defendant interfered with the victim's business.

shall not be deemed to exist.

Nevertheless, the court below convicted the charged facts of this case. The court below erred by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (the amount of KRW 700,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. On December 20, 2016, the Defendant: (a) registered the instant store in the name of the Defendant and jointly operated the store in the name of the Defendant at the victim C and Cheong-gu, Seo-gu, Seo-gu; (b) the victim paid KRW 20 million to the Defendant.

유사 판례

-청주지방법원 2018.03.29 2017고정627

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.08.10 2017노958

-인천지방법원 2018.10.12 2017나54800

-서울중앙지방법원 2016.12.15 2014가합61567

-대구지방법원 2020.10.23 2019가단137843