(영문) 대전지방법원 2014.02.20 2013노2805 | 리걸엔진

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 대전지방법원 2014.02.20 2013노2805

업무방해등

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

Reasons

1. The sentence of 10 months sentenced by the court below on the summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable.

2. Ex officio determination

A. According to Article 63(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, if the dwelling, office, or present address of the defendant is unknown, service by public notice may be made, and Article 23 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings and Article 19(1) of the Rules on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings provides that service by public notice shall be made only when the defendant's whereabouts are not confirmed until six months have passed from the date of receipt of the report, although the defendant's whereabouts were taken necessary measures to confirm the defendant's whereabouts. In light of the above six-month period is the minimum period established to protect the defendant's right to trial and right to attack and defense, "the time of receipt of the report" shall be strictly interpreted (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2003Do4983, Nov. 14, 2003).

In addition, if the location of the defendant was confirmed after the receipt of the report on the failure to serve on the defendant, if the location of the defendant was confirmed after the confirmation of the location of the defendant, the service can be made by means of public notice when the location of the defendant is not confirmed, even though the defendant took necessary measures to confirm the location of the defendant after six months from the receipt of the report.

I would like to say.

B. According to the records, the court below served a copy of the indictment against the defendant, a notice of appointment of state appointed defense counsel, a writ of summons of the defendant, etc. on the grounds that the defendant's domicile as stated in the indictment is "V, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun," but continued to be served on the defendant due to the lack of closure, the addressee is unknown, and the director is unknown,

참조조문

-소송촉진 등에 관한 특례법 제23조

-형사소송법 제63조 제1항

참조판례

-대법원 2003. 11. 14. 선고 2003도4983 판결

유사 판례

-대전지방법원 2015.01.28 2014노2222

-대전지방법원 2015.04.23 2014노3795

-창원지방법원 2013.03.14 2013노75

-부산지방법원 2016.11.10 2016노3122

-부산지방법원 2013.10.11 2013노2603