beta
Text
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
The defendant shall be innocent.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The Defendant did not interfere with the victim’s restaurant business.
B. The sentence imposed by the court below on the grounds of unreasonable sentencing (the fine of 300,000 won) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case and the judgment of the court below 1) The Defendant found the Defendant guilty of the instant charges by taking full account of the evidence in the judgment of the court below, including: (a) from September 30, 2013 to September 12:20 of the same day, the Defendant found in the “Ecafeteria operated by the Seoul Dongdaemun-gu Seoul Dongdaemun-gu C Victim D,” and brooms, “I am well fright and well broom,” and brooms, “I am fright and well broom, I am fright by parking in India, and I am fright.”
B. “In the crime of interference with business by the crime of interference with the crime of interference with the trial of the political party” means all the forces capable of suppressing and mixing a free will of a person, and is not tangible or intangible. As such, violence, intimidation, as well as social, economic, and political status and pressure based on royalty, etc. are included therein. In reality, the victim’s free will is not required to be controlled. However, it refers to the force sufficient to suppress the victim’s free will in light of the offender’s status, number of persons, surrounding circumstances, etc. As such, whether it constitutes force ought to be determined objectively by taking into account all the circumstances, such as the date and place of the crime, motive, purpose, number of persons involved in the crime, form of force, type of duty, type of duty, and the status of the victim.
(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 99Do495, May 28, 199; 2010Do9186, Nov. 25, 2010). Meanwhile, in a criminal trial, the conviction should be based on evidence with probative value sufficient for a judge to have a reasonable doubt that the facts charged are true, and if there is no such evidence, the conviction against the defendant.