logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2016.09.22 2016구합100064
감봉처분취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. From March 28, 2013 to June 14, 2013, the Plaintiff is the head of the Korea Air Force Academy B, who served as F, an administrative soldier affiliated with C, D, and B, who was an administrative soldier dispatched from a military police branch to B (hereinafter “victims”).

B. The Plaintiff appealed from the first instance court (Ministry of National Defense general military court 2014Da3) by having been sentenced to a fine of KRW 3 million due to abuse of authority, obstruction of exercise of rights, assault, and intimidation as follows (hereinafter “instant criminal facts”).

The appellate court (2014No177) accepted the Plaintiff’s appeal regarding the crime of this case in relation to the crime of abusing authority and obstructing another’s exercise of rights and obstructing another’s exercise of rights under paragraph (1), and rendered a not guilty verdict on the remainder of the crime, and sentenced a fine of two million won to be convicted. The judgment of the appellate court became final and conclusive on June 24, 2015

(Supreme Court Decision 2015Do4230). Around April 4, 2013, the Defendant: (a) abused the authority of the chief of the office on April 4, 2013, the Defendant had C, who was in charge of driving disease duties by abusing the authority of the chief of the office; and (b) had C, who was in charge of personal banking duties of the Defendant, drive an official car from the above national bank to the unit of the National Bank located in Yongsandong-si to return to the unit, and return to the unit.

2. Violence;

A. On April 11, 2013, the Defendant got 4-5 times the victim C’s photographed at the head of the office of the Korea Air Force Academy B, on the ground that the Defendant’s living education was shaken.

B. On April 29, 2013, at the above B office around 10:20 on April 29, 2013, the Defendant: (a) stated that “all thoughts would be considered as a whole; and (b) “I think that I think I think I think I would like to do so;” and (c) sealed the victim D’s transfer by hand.

C. The Defendant, around 16:00 on May 2, 2013, committed a promise in advance at the above B office and did not mislead the Defendant.

arrow