logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2013.12.12 2013고정3610
업무방해등
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,000,000.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant loaned KRW 10,00,000,000 to D with the contract terminated and it was asked to request D to recover the down payment. On April 3, 2012, the Defendant sent the victim’s cell phone with the victim’s cell phone the word “a thickness to attend from her to her from her present time after being delegated at the time of inside, and going to work at her present,” and on April 28, 2012, sent the victim’s cell phone with the victim’s cell phone “on April 17, 2012, the Defendant sent the victim’s cell phone with the word “the victim’s cell phone of her day-to-day-day-day-day-time-time-time-time-time-time-time-time-time-time-time-time-time-paid-free-free-free-free-free-free-free-free-free-free-free-free-free-free-free-

In addition, at around 15:00 on May 4, 2012, the Defendant, at the G coffee shop located in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, threatened the victim as if the Defendant continued to comply with the demand for the return of the down payment due to the Defendant’s words “the victim would be placed a banner as the victim’s boomed from this year, under the franchisation, and the franchisation into the franchis shop.”

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes on witness E’s legal statement;

1. Relevant Article 283 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts, the choice of a fine, and the choice of a fine;

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. As to the assertion of the Defendant and his defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act regarding the crime of intimidation in this case, the Defendant asserts that sending or abusiveing letters to the victim was made in the process of receiving money from the victim and is an act permissible by social norms. However, the statement as stated in the facts of the crime committed by the victim is sufficient to regard the victim as a threat of harm that constitutes the crime of intimidation, and such statement exceeds the permissible level and scope under social norms.

Part not guilty (the point of interference with each business);

1. The summary of each of the facts charged, the Defendant

(a) April 2012

arrow