2012No2290 Business Obstruction, Intimidation

Defendant, Non-Service

Prosecutor

Kim Jong-seok (Court of Second Instance), and Park Jae-in (Court of Second Instance)

Attorney Kim Hung-hun (Korean National Security Office)

Daegu District Court Decision 2012Gohap374 Decided July 19, 2012

October 12, 2012

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

In light of the fact that neighboring residents, including the victims, wanting the strict punishment of the defendant, the number of crimes is several times, the atmosphere, stick, etc., and the failure of happiness is added, etc., the punishment of the defendant (two months of imprisonment) sentenced by the court below is too uneasable and unfair.

2. Determination

The defendant is under detention for a considerable period of time, and there are favorable circumstances such as the defendant's absence of any other punishment, except that he was punished by a minor fine around 1991 and around 2012. However, the crime of this case is committed in various times in the vicinity of his residence under the influence of alcohol, government offices, and on the street, so that the defendant's duties such as a main agent, public official, etc. have been seriously interfered with, as well as that the defendant's duties have been seriously interfered with, and the surrounding residents, including female students and their parents, were deemed to have been suffering from considerable anxiety (the defendant's 's 's age' and 's parents'. The defendant was called as the victim', and the defendant's 's 's 's 's age' and 's 'age' without the consent of the victim and 's 's children', and the defendant' appears to have interfered with the defendant's environment, such as drinking children' and 's 1 to 1 to 1 to 37.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the prosecutor's appeal is justified, and the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is again decided as follows.

Criminal facts and summary of evidence

The summary of the facts constituting an offense and evidence recognized by this court is as stated in the corresponding column of the judgment below, and thus, it is quoted in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Article relevant to the facts constituting an offense and the selection of punishment;

Article 283 (1) of the Criminal Code (the point of intimidation, the choice of imprisonment), Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Code (the point of interference with business, the choice of imprisonment)

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

Articles 37 (former part), 38 (1) 2, and 50 of the Criminal Act

The presiding judge and the deputy judge;

Judges Scaria

Judges Kim Gun-chul