logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 제주지방법원 2016.09.29 2016고단1434
특수협박
Text

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

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On April 13, 2016, the Defendant: (a) while driving a son-free vehicle from the off-line of the rash road in front of the front of the Jeju-si, on the surface of the rash road to the surface of the rash in the same door; (b) without using a direction device on the ground that the 5-si taxi of the preceding victim D driving rapidly operated by the E-5 taxi, the Defendant: (c) turned the previous 1 lane in the front of the said taxi; (d) turned the vehicle into the front of the said taxi; (c) was unable to drive the said taxi on the one-lane road; and (d) when the two vehicles stops in front of the two vehicles pursuant to the new subparagraph of the cross-road stop on the one-lane road, she spited the above taxi on the window, spited it on the part of the victim; and (d) was likely to threaten the victim’s life or body by carrying the goods on the part of the victim by taking a bath to the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. A report on investigation (report on the attachment of black stay images) and a report on investigation (report on the analysis of black stay images);

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes governing black boxes and video CDs;

1. Relevant Article 284 of the Criminal Act, Articles 283(1) and 283 of the Criminal Act, the choice of fines concerning the crime, and the selection of fines;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. The reason for sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the Aggravated Punishment of the Aggravated Punishment Order is that the Defendant committed the special intimidation in this case by obstructing the course of the victim by using a dangerous vehicle, which is a dangerous object, on the ground that the taxi driver of the victim who was in front of the Defendant was rapidly driving, and neglecting the quality of the crime in light of the motive, method, etc. of the crime. The crime of retaliation driving in this case is a crime that may cause serious harm to the life and body of the other party driver or the passenger of the vehicle, as well as the driver or the passenger of the other vehicle, and the defendant was not used for the above crime from the victim.

arrow