logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2014.06.20 2014노215
공갈등
Text

All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The prosecutor (1) found the Defendant not guilty on the grounds that the subject was selected as the basic recipient due to insufficient examination by the public official in charge of the obstruction of the performance of official duties by fraudulent means (Supreme Court Decisions 2010Do7033 Decided August 25, 201; 2002Do2064 Decided September 4, 2002). Since the public official in charge selects the subjects as the basic recipient through sufficient examination according to the provisions of the National Basic Living Security Act, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts and thereby acquitted the Defendant of the charges of obstruction of the performance of official duties by deceptive means.

(2) The court below held the Defendant not guilty of the facts charged of violating the National Basic Living Security Act on the ground that Article 49 of the National Basic Living Security Act only applies to cases where a person, including AJ, filed an application for basic supply and demand, but did not receive the benefits, and that there is no provision punishing an attempted criminal under the above Act. In light of the text of the above Act, it is reasonable to interpret that when a public official in charge decides to pay benefits, he/she constitutes a violation of Article 49 of the National Basic Living Security Act (the issue of whether a person received benefits thereafter does not affect the establishment of a crime). The court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on the violation

(3) The sentence sentenced by the lower court of unreasonable sentencing (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too uneased and unreasonable.

B. (1) The lower court convicted Defendant (1) of violating the National Basic Living Security Act and misapprehending the legal doctrine, and convicted Defendant of all of the charges charged for violating the National Basic Living Security Act.

(1) However, a false certificate of employment wage (crime list 1), vocational training certificate (crime list 2), and a person who wishes to be selected as a basic recipient.

arrow