logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2019.05.09 2018노837
건조물침입
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (based on factual errors, misunderstanding of the legal principles) was examined by the victims of “D” of the religious group at the time of the instant case, and entered the instant building through the front door opened for coverage purposes, and immediately went out of the building upon the request of the information center of the Yongsan Police Station to return to the building.

The defendant's act cannot be seen as infringing on the building, and even if it was invaded, it is a justifiable act that does not go against the social norms.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion that a building is not infringed upon, the crime of intrusion upon a structure under management shall be established by entering the structure without the consent of the manager of the structure, or against the explicit or presumed intention of the manager, without justifiable reasons.

According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below, the following circumstances are recognized, and the defendant, upon compiling this, has invaded the building of this case without justifiable reasons against the explicit or presumed intention of the manager of the building of this case.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion that the building is not invaded is without merit.

1) The Defendant was working as a journalist in religious-related magazines, and there was an exchange with the victims by coverage, etc. at the time of gathering communication with D’s children when the communication with D’s children was discontinued. At the time of the instant case, D’s victims want to have their own children confirm their own children in the instant building, but D’s opposition was anticipated, and carried out a demonstration in and around the instant building without entering the instant building. The Defendant was under contact with D’s victims to conduct a demonstration, and the Defendant was well aware of these circumstances at the time of arrival in front of the instant building. (ii) At the information center of the Yongsan Police Station, the Defendant was the Defendant from the stairs of the instant building.

arrow