logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 순천지원 2014.09.17 2014고정348
재물손괴
Text

The sentence of punishment against the Defendants shall be suspended separately.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. Defendant A: (a) around December 2013, 2013, the Defendant: (b) removed a fix card of the phrase “I will see. I will see. F and G” attached to the victim E from the front door of the D Building, and destroyed one fix card equivalent to KRW 48,000 at the market price.

2. Defendant B

A. From January 7, 2014 to 19:55, the Defendant destroyed four plug cards equivalent to the market price of KRW 192,00,00 by requiring a landscaping business entity who performed work to remove four plug cards, which require the victim E to repair the defects attached to the wall at the place under the foregoing paragraph (1).

B. On January 13, 2014, the Defendant: (a) ordered H to remove any printed matter requiring repair, etc. of defects attached by the victim E on the wall of the wall management office of the location D building management office of the place under the foregoing paragraph (1); and (b) destroyed 5-6 printed matter of which the market price is unknown.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. The Defendants and the defense counsel regarding the Defendants’ written statement of the police as to E and the defense counsel’s assertion is the legitimate act since the Defendants removed the printed materials installed by the victim for the purpose of preventing the conflict between the occupants of the D building due to the improper problem raising of the victim and the decline in the housing market price of the D building that has not been completed. However, since there is no evidence to support the Defendants at the time, the Defendants opened the council of occupants’ representatives, etc. to obtain consent from the remaining occupants or made efforts to obtain such consent, the above circumstances alone are difficult to view the Defendants’ act as a justifiable act that does not contravene the social norms, and the above argument cannot

Application of Statutes

1. Article 36 of the Criminal Act; Article 366 of the Criminal Act; Defendant A who selects a fine: Article 366 of the Criminal Act; Selection of a fine; and Selection of a fine, respectively.

arrow