(영문) 청주지방법원 2015.09.03 2015노623 | 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 2015.09.03 2015노623

주거침입등

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of the grounds for appeal (the mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles);

A. As to the crime of Article 1 of the judgment below, the Defendant, as a lessor of “G” shop located in D, a considerable area of the Cheongju-si operated by the victims (hereinafter “instant shop”), was holding the key of the entrance door of the instant shop according to prior agreement with the victims, and therefore, the Defendant’s entry into the instant shop by using the said key is not a crime of intrusion upon residence.

B. As to the crime No. 2 of the decision of the court below, it cannot be deemed that the victim's business operation was hindered due to the act as stated in Paragraph 2 of the decision of the court below, and the defendant did not have an intention to interfere with the business.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court as to whether the crime of intrusion upon residence was established, i.e., ① the victims operated the instant store as a legitimate lessee of the instant store; ② the Defendant was in possession of a key as a lessor of the instant store; ② the victims did not have access to the instant store at his discretion when the victims were absent, except the date and time as specified in paragraph (1) of the lower judgment; ③ there was no circumstance to deem that the victims had understood that the Defendant had access to the instant store at will in a dispute over the lease relationship between the Defendant and the instant store; and ③ there was no circumstance to deem that the Defendant had access to the instant store at will, even if the Defendant, as a lessor, was in possession of the key to the instant store, it is reasonable to deem that the Defendant violated the

Therefore, the conclusion of the court below that found the defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged is correct, and there is no error of mistake or misapprehension of legal principles as pointed out by the

This part of the defendant's argument is reasonable.

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 안산지원 2013.04.18 2012고정2182

-청주지방법원 2015.05.21 2014고정898

-서울중앙지방법원 2016.05.26 2016고정896

-서울남부지방법원 2020.12.18 2020나57576

-수원지방법원 2014.12.17 2014고단5589