logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2012.10.24 2012고정920
업무방해
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

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

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

(State) On February 9, 201, the Defendant entered into a contract with the competent public office director in charge of the C’s construction site and construction contract, and around February 9, 201, the Defendant suspended the construction of materials and on-site office (container 1) at the site of the said construction site and the construction of soil in the construction site of the project from February 9, 201 to May 31, 201, with respect to the cost of construction work from February 9, 2011 to May 31, 201, with respect to the Ftel and the neighboring neighborhood construction work from the (E)E that the victim D serves as a management director.

On July 201, 201, when the Defendant Company requested the Defendant to return the key to the entrance door of the construction site, the Defendant Company lost the right to possess the right of possession of the construction site since it was difficult for the Defendant Company to leave the key to the entrance door of the construction site, while the Defendant Company kept and managed the key to the entrance door of the construction site. From August 5, 2011, the Defendant Company lost the right of possession of the Defendant Company, including the Victim Company and another subcontractor, and the Plaintiff Company, a subcontractor, had been performing construction remaining at the construction site.

Nevertheless, the Defendant asserts that there was a lien on the above site because he did not receive the construction cost. On November 9, 201, the Defendant: (a) allowed the employees of the security service company at the construction site of the Ftel and the construction site of neighboring neighboring life, to park the J vehicle at the entrance of the construction site; (b) prevented the Defendant Company from entering the construction site by leaving the J vehicle at the entrance of the construction site; and (c) in collusion with the said K which was subcontracted to the construction site by the Defendant Company, the said K from entering the boom for boom boom, which is working at the construction site; and (d) around November 12, 201, by having the said K use the entrance door door door at the above site, and by closing the entrance and closing the entrance, preventing the entry of the between used vehicles, etc. by December 2011.

arrow