(영문) 춘천지방법원 2013.05.02 2012고정624

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) 춘천지방법원 2013.05.02 2012고정624

재물은닉

Text

A defendant shall be punished by a fine of 500,000 won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On February 2, 2012, the Defendant: (a) had, in order to lease a restaurant for sale of the first floor of the C building in Chuncheon, “E”, which was operated by the victim D; and (b) had, in order to lease a restaurant for sale of the first floor of the C building to another person, the Defendant concealed 31 goods listed in the attached list of crimes, such as Green Ba, etc., owned by the victim; and (c) concealed the market value.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statements of the accused in part of the trial records first and second times;

1. Statements made by witnesses D and F in the second trial records;

1. Statement made to D by the police;

1. A complaint;

1. Written estimate of items to be damaged and photographed (excluding parts of goods samples);

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of the certification;

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act and Articles 366, 34 (1) and 31 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the choice of punishment for the crime;

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

1. First of all, the judgment on the argument of the Defendant and the defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the claim of the Defendant of the provisional payment order: (a) the victim D ceased to operate a restaurant by leasing the “E” (hereinafter “instant store”); and (b) the victim was in arrears with various public charges, such as electricity, water, and water charges; and (c) the victim was in arrears with the goods of the victim; and (d) as alleged by the Defendant, even though the lease contract for the instant store was terminated, the victim neglected the goods stored in the leased object, and thus, the Defendant left the victim’s goods.

Even if the defendant should have exercised his right by legal procedure such as filing a civil suit against the victim, and such exercise of right is not possible, it is difficult to regard the defendant's act as a self-help act that prevents illegality.

Next, the object owned by the victim that the defendant had F left by the defendant is attached.

참조조문

유사 판례

-울산지방법원 2019.06.18 2017고정1118

-인천지방법원 2019.05.02 2018나58489

-서울중앙지방법원 2021.04.21 2020고단882

-서울동부지방법원 2014.09.16 2013고정1840

-서울서부지방법원 2015.06.16 2014고단2082