(영문) 수원지방법원 2018.02.22 2017노3375 | 리걸엔진

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) 수원지방법원 2018.02.22 2017노3375

협박

Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts) and G, a victim and his/her dependent, are not legal professionals, and there is a possibility that the defendant made a statement by focusing on the fact that he/she took a bath more than the fact that he/she made a threat of harm and injury at the time of the instant case. Thus, even though he/she is not somewhat consistent with his/her statement, the credibility of his/her statement cannot be denied. In light of the circumstances of the instant case, it is sufficiently probable that the defendant made a threat like the statement in the facts charged, the defendant may sufficiently recognize the fact that he/she made a threat to the victim, such as the statement in the facts charged.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below that acquitted the defendant on the facts charged of this case is erroneous by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is whether the Defendant: (a) informed the Defendant of the location of the vehicle (F and low scarX) that the victim D borrowed money from E and offered as security within the “C” store operated by the Defendant at early April 2015, which was operated by the Defendant, and (b) changed the Defendant to notify the Defendant of the location of the vehicle (F and low scarX).

why is why the test is found;

In addition, the victim threatened the victim by stating that the death of the dead body was discarded only once.

B. First of all, the lower court examined the victims D and their respective legal statements and statements in investigation agencies as follows, which are evidence that seem to correspond to the facts charged in the instant case, as follows.

A) On April 20, 2015, the victim D, including a statement in an investigative agency, filed a complaint with the defendant, etc. against the defendant, etc. at the Sung-nam Branch Office of the Suwon District Prosecutors' Office, and the complaint contains the following descriptions in relation to intimidation:

“H (afterwardly, I) made intimidation and obsesses to the effect that “if you talk any more on one occasion, you find it in the house and die.”

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 성남지원 2017.05.10 2016고정1548

-대전지방법원 천안지원 2020.04.29 2020고단663

-수원지방법원 평택지원 2018.05.01 2017고정682

-부산지방법원 2016.10.20 2016고단3492

-서울중앙지방법원 2018.11.01 2018고정515