(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2017.08.09 2017고단1505

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) 서울동부지방법원 2017.08.09 2017고단1505

특수협박등

Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the execution of sentence shall be suspended for a period of one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant, as a member of the CF market merchant in Seoul and the victim D, is the president of the CF, and the Defendant, as the victim, did not disclose the contents consulted with the CFF in consultation with the E underground floor to move the victim to the said market to the E underground floor, and did not object to a passive response even to compensation.

1. Around 14:00 on April 27, 2017, the Defendant damaged the property in an amount equivalent to KRW 100,000,00 of the market price by means of cutting off two glass windows of the above association offices, even though the Defendant demanded the victim to disclose the matters consulted with the Agricultural and Fishery Food Corporation at the office of Seoul B market C, which was required by the victim to disclose.

2. On May 8, 2017, the Defendant: (a) on the same date as the foregoing “1:30 on May 8, 2017, the Defendant destroyed property in an amount equivalent to KRW 200,00 in the market price by destroying four glass windows of the above partnership offices using a pipe, which is a dangerous object with which the Defendant has been placed, to move the shops of the agricultural and fishery food corporation and its members into E underground floor.

3. The Defendant, like the foregoing “2, intruded into a special structure,” took a plastic box containing about 20 literss, which are dangerous goods at F’s stores, and intruded into a partnership office, the same place as the above “1” around May 8, 2017, with the aim of threatening the victims and employees in the above partnership office to give a fright to the office.

As a result, the defendant does not carry dangerous articles in the above partnership office with the purpose of threatening the victim, and does not enter the gasoline office and does not carry them outside the office.

It is more likely to punish the act of intrusion with dangerous objects more than that of ordinary intrusion.

유사 판례

-부산지방법원 2017.05.10 2017고정375

-춘천지방법원 강릉지원 2018.10.16 2018고단686

-서울중앙지방법원 2016.02.15 2015고정2380

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.03.07 2017고단146

-서울서부지방법원 2017.01.12 2016고정1091