(영문) 수원지방법원 2019.08.23 2019고정695

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) 수원지방법원 2019.08.23 2019고정695

절도

Text

The sentence of sentence against the defendant shall be suspended.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On February 2, 2019, around 14:00, the Defendant: (a) installed a banner to prevent the victim E who operated the English kindergarten from showing the Fhogate owned by the Defendant; (b) removed the above banner owned by the victim; and (c) stolen it.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. A protocol concerning the suspect examination of the accused;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes concerning police statements to E;

1. Article 329 of the Criminal Act and Article 329 of the Criminal Act concerning the crime, the choice of fines;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. Judgment on the defendant's assertion of Article 59 (1) of the Criminal Act (limited to a fine of 300,000 won per day, and a fine of 100,000 won) of the suspended sentence

1. The Defendant’s assertion: (a) the Defendant asserts that: (b) while there was a dispute over the lease of a commercial building between the Defendant and the victim, the victim installed a banner entirely covering the part of the Defendant’s sectional ownership; and (c) the Defendant removed the above banner to use it as evidence in the future lawsuit; (d) the Defendant did not have an intent to obtain unlawful acquisition; and (b) even if the Defendant’s intent to obtain unlawful acquisition is recognized, it constitutes a justifiable act and thus, the illegality is dismissed.

2. Determination

A. In light of the fact that the Defendant immediately removed and removed the banner from the victim without any resistance or notice, and if the Defendant institutes a lawsuit against the victim, it would be a claim for the reason that the lease of the sectional ownership was obstructed by installing the banner. In this case, since the subject of proof is the situation where the banner was installed, sufficient evidence can be secured by photographing, etc., the Defendant installed the banner that completely sets up the part of the Defendant’s sectional ownership of the commercial building.

참조조문

유사 판례

-대법원 1986. 7. 8. 선고 86도354 판결

-부산고법 1989. 11. 29. 선고 88노532 제2형사부판결 : 파기자판

-인천지방법원 2019.01.18 2018노2123

-대법원 2011. 8. 18. 선고 2010도9570 판결

-광주지방법원 2019.4.30. 선고 2018노2654 판결