(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2019.09.05 2019노1126

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) 서울중앙지방법원 2019.09.05 2019노1126

경범죄처벌법위반

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

All the costs of the original judgment and the trial shall be borne by the defendant.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (definite or misunderstanding of legal principles) was that the Defendant provided two times in front of the victim’s residence (Seoul Gangnam-gu B and C) (Seoul, Gangnam-gu) on June 5, 2018, that “the parking was wrong. 2 years later, how the parking was finite,” and that “the Defendant finites the first race, fins the door, fins the door, or fins the door, or fins the door, “h. d. d. d. d. d. d. d. d. d. d. d. d. d. d. d. d. d. d. d. d. d. d. d. d. d. d. d. d. d.

2. According to the judgment of the court below and the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below, it is reasonable to view that the defendant committed an act of creating anxiety in this case, and the above argument by the defendant is without merit.

The victim appeared as a witness in the court of the court below, stated that the defendant committed an act of creating anxiety in this case, and the police stated to the same effect as the above testimony, and prepared a statement to the same effect as the above testimony and submitted it to the police.

B. According to the “112 Report Processing List” (Evidence No. 11 of the Evidence Record), it is confirmed that the victim reported around 01:28 on June 5, 2018 and reported at around 112, 2018, stating that “the victim shall open the door outside, and cut off the vehicle.”

C. One of the two police officers dispatched at the time of the occurrence of the instant case, E was present as a witness at the court of the court below and led to a multi-household house (Seoul Gangnam-gu Seoul Gangnam-gu) in which the victim’s residence is located in the vehicle, where the victim was living in the vehicle.

When the above multi-household house arrives before, other tenants were able to enter into the same as automatic door immediately. However, even if they were not asked, the tenant was “not only once but also several times before the time.”

Elevators shall be aboard.

유사 판례

-의정부지방법원 2014.10.30 2014고정304

-대구지방법원 2016.10.14 2016노297

-의정부지방법원 2014.04.18 2013노2290

-의정부지방법원 2013.12.06 2013노1848

-수원지방법원 2013.01.24 2012노4989