logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원성남지원 2020.08.10 2020고단1536
업무방해
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

Around 20:00 on April 28, 2020, the Defendant interfered with the operation of the convenience store by force for about 15 minutes, including, under the influence of alcohol, the victim B (n, 47 years of age) was in Seongbuk-gu, Seongbuk-gu, Sungnam-gu, Seoul, where he works as an employee, the Defendant took a bath to the victim on the ground that he did not know any defect in the price and the price in the display room, and the victim did not notify the product of the defect and the price.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of the police protocol protocol law to B

1. Relevant Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, the choice of imprisonment;

1. Grounds for sentencing under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Scope of the recommended punishment according to the sentencing guidelines [the scope of the recommended punishment [the determination of a type of punishment] interference with the affairs [the category 1] interference with the affairs (the special person] - the mitigation elements: the mitigation area (including the advanced efforts for recovery of damage) and the mitigation area of punishment [the recommendation area and the scope of recommended punishment], imprisonment with labor for one month to eight months;

2. The Defendant, who was sentenced to the crime of interference with business, has already been punished several times, including the suspended sentence of imprisonment, but also committed the instant crime.

On the other hand, however, the defendant reflects his mistake, and immediately after the occurrence of the case, the victim did not want punishment against the defendant by mutual consent with the victim.

The degree of interference with business does not seem to be relatively serious.

In addition, the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and result of the crime of this case, various circumstances revealed in pleadings, such as the situation after the crime, and the scope of recommended sentencing guidelines, etc. shall be determined as per the order.

arrow