logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2018.02.06 2017고정1774
협박등
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,000,000.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won shall be one day.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a person who works in a public sector, and is a victim C (at least 56 years of age, female) with his/her face.

1. The Defendant, at around 16:00 on October 5, 2017, as well as at around 16:0 on “EE” located in Gangdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, will put the owner of a plant into the detention house unless the owner of a plant does not pay one million won of the loan granted by the owner of a plant for the same year of the Crap.

It is not possible to throw away the door up to the right angle and prevent funeral services.

“The victim threatened”.

Accordingly, the defendant threatened the victim.

2. On the same day, the Defendant: (a) re-exploited “E”, a place in the same manner as 20:00 on the same day; (b) led the victim to drive money; and (c) prevented customers from entering the area with a noise of approximately 2 hours; (d) the Defendant was able to drive money.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the victim's work by force.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against C;

1. Application of the statutes governing the arrest of flagrant offenders;

1. Relevant Article 283(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act, and Article 283(1) of the Criminal Act, the selection of fines for a crime;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;

1. The grounds for sentencing under Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act, including the fact that the Defendant was subject to criminal punishment on the grounds of violence-related crimes, and that the victim did not recover damage, etc., the amount of fine under the summary order does not seem to be excessive in light of the sentencing conditions indicated in the instant trial.

arrow