logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 2017.12.27 2017노2893
재물손괴
Text

All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of the legal principles) is that the Defendants only moved the position of the tin installed by the victim in the process of leaving the existing tin left alone by committing the crime of damage to property before the instant case on the job, and such act is a legitimate act that does not violate the social rules and thus is dismissed from illegality.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which convicted the Defendant of the facts charged of this case is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles.

2. The phrase “act that does not contravene the social norms” under Article 20 of the Criminal Act refers to an act that is acceptable in light of the overall spirit of legal order or the social ethics or social norms surrounding it, and whether a certain act is justified as an act that does not contravene the social norms and thus, should be determined individually by examining and determining the illegality of the act as a justifiable act that does not contravene the social norms under specific circumstances. Thus, to recognize such a legitimate act, the requirements such as legitimacy of the motive or purpose of the act, reasonableness of the means or method of the act, balance of the legal interests of the protected and infringed interests, urgency, and supplementary nature that there is no other means or method other than the act should be met.

According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, the lower court: ① (a) was sentenced to a fine of KRW 2 million on October 20, 2016 (Seoul District Court 2016DaMa134), and the said judgment became final and conclusive on October 28, 2016; (b) the Defendants removed the tin from the place where the victims installed using the marator around 07:0 on November 6, 2016, using the marator around 07:0 on the same day to describe the mar on November 6, 2016; and (c) neglected the existing mar at the place where the mar was removed from the mar in the first place; and (d) neglected the mar in the first place where the mar was installed by using the marator on October 20, 2016.

arrow