Defendant

A shall be punished by a fine of 50,000 won, and a fine of 300,000 won, respectively.

The above fines are imposed by the Defendants.

Criminal facts

Defendants are labor union members belonging to the DNo General E branch.

The FF Company's high-speed business division requested the FF Company G to operate the bus in order to prevent operational gap due to the strike of the members of the staff belonging to the DM.

1. 피고인 A 피고인은 2011. 7. 23. 12:43경 광주 서구 H터미널 입구에서, 유한회사 G 소속 운전기사인 피해자 I(남, 32세)이 J 버스를 운전하여 터미널 안쪽으로 진입하려 하자 화가 나, 위 버스를 가로막고 운전석 창문으로 다가가 “개새끼야. 누가 운행하라고 했어. 호로새끼, 죽여버린다. 상놈새끼.”라고 욕하며 펄쩍 뛰어올라 주먹으로 안경 낀 피해자의 얼굴을 1회 때려 폭행함과 동시에, 피해자의 안경이 떨어져 파손되도록 하여 시가 25만 원 상당의 안경을 손괴하였다.

2. At the time and place mentioned in the above paragraph (1), the Defendant: (a) obstructed the victim K (Nam, 47 years old) who is the head of the FF corporation's business; (b) avoided the victim's face on a one-time basis in order to prevent the operation of the said I bus; and (c) maintained the victim's face on a one-time basis, and (d) maintained the victim's "spacin, spacin, spacin and spacin" requiring approximately two weeks of treatment.

Summary of Evidence

1. The legal statement of the witness K and I;

1. Statement of the police officer to I;

1. A written diagnosis of injury;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on the list of multi-permanent public officials;

1. Defendant A of the relevant Article of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting a crime: Articles 260 (1) and 366 of the Criminal Act: Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Defendant A of ordinary concurrence: Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Defendants: Determination of a fine for negligence

1. Defendants of detention in a workhouse: Articles 70 and 69(2) of the Criminal Act

1. Defendants of the provisional payment order: The defense counsel for the determination of the defense counsel’s assertion under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the instant act committed by the Defendant, etc. to restrain illegal alternative labor on the part of the company during the process of lawful industrial action is dismissed as it constitutes a justifiable act.