2013Gohap3 Violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Retaliatory Crimes, etc.) and names

Examples damage, interference with business, promotion of the use of information and communications networks and information protection, etc.

Violation of the Act

Lee,○ (58******************) and Company Members

Daejeon: Not more than Daejeon

Doo-si in the place of registration:

Freeboard (Public Prosecution) and Maternity (Public Trial)

Attorney Im Chang-soo

April 24, 2013

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

Criminal facts

1. Violation of Information and Communications Network Utilization Promotion Act;

On August 12, 2009, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of three years for a year of imprisonment with labor due to the crime of indecent act by force against the victim ① by the Daejeon District Court on the following grounds: (a) the victim’s accusation was punished as above; and (b) the victim’s victim’s sexual intercourse with intent to bullying; (c) on August 26, 2012, the victim’s cell phone 14 times; and (d) on the victim’s cell phone 14 times, the victim’s cell phone lives over four times; and (e) the victim’s phone lives begin from now; (e) the victim’s live machine per se does not have to take place at all; (e) the victim’s bitch 1,00,00 bit 60,000,000 bit 1,000,000 on the victim’s body, 1,000,000.

As a result, the Defendant repeatedly reached the victim’s language that arouses fears or apprehensions through information and communications networks.

2. Violation of the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes Act;

On December 8, 2012, the Defendant, as stated in the preceding paragraph, had intended to be punished due to the victim’s accusation, and had expressed an attitude of threatening the victim as to any harm to the victim’s life and body, such as, on December 8, 2012, around 30, 2012, in hub real estate of the operation of the seaer in Daejeon Dong-dong 159-11, Dong-dong, Daejeon, that “A Dong-dong Police Agency know?” The Defendant was trying to reasonably think of the victim.

3. Interference with business;

On September 24, 2012: around 00, the Defendant: (a) stated that the victim was punished by filing a complaint with the Defendant on his/her own, and entered the said real estate; (b) obstructed the victim’s real estate brokerage business by force on the ground that he/she was subject to the control from his/her employee Kim Jong-ket. (c) “I am out of why he/she was dissatisfy; (d) I am back with his/her back, and “I am fy, I am, and I am. I am. I am out of the back.”

4. Defamation;

A. On September 21, 2009, the Defendant: (a) misleads the victim and the frighter of gambling to believe that she is a frighter; (b) sent pictures that seem to have been off the victim on the cellular phone of YBB; and (c) frightered on the phone of YBBBB, who she was called “IBBBBB,” and she was called “IBBBBB.” (i) There was a gap between BBBB, she left, and she was promptly and promptly living for a few years; and (iii) there was a well fright of the victim; and (iv) there was a damage to the reputation of

B. On September 24, 2012: (a) around 15:35, the Defendant: (b) at the bus stops in front of the instant hub real estate; and (c) notwithstanding that the victim is not an employee Kim Mandong and a couple; (b) the victim does not have an employee Kim Mandong and a couple; (c) the victim interfered with the victim’s work, as described in the foregoing paragraph (3) and took place out, and the victim’s reputation was damaged by publicly pointing out false facts with the victim’s reputation, as stated in the foregoing paragraph (3).

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement of the accused in the first protocol of trial;

1. (1) Each statement made at the police station's statement on knife and knife knife

1. On-site photographs, the text messages of the mobile phone, telephone recording records (to be submitted by the victim), copies of the judgment, and the investigation reports, respectively; 1. On-site photographs, the text messages pictures of the case, and the images of the instant images;

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Article of the Criminal Act and the selection of punishment for the crime;

Articles 74(1)3 and 44-7 of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, Etc.

Paragraph (1) 3 (Redirective Transmission of language and text causing fears, etc.; Selection of Imprisonment); Aggravated Punishment of Specific Crimes

Article 5-9(2) and (1) of the Act on Promotion, etc., and Article 283(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of intimidation for Purpose of Retaliation);

Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act (Interference with Business, Selection of Imprisonment), Article 307(1) of the Criminal Act

The point of damages, the choice of imprisonment), Article 307(2) of the Criminal Act (the point of defamation of false facts, imprisonment, etc.)

- the type choice),

2. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

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

Aggravation of concurrent crimes in violation of the Punishment, etc. Act (Retaliatory Crimes, etc.)

to the extent of the aggregate)

Reasons for sentencing

1. Scope of applicable sentences under Acts: Imprisonment with prison labor for one year to 43 years; and

2. Application of the sentencing criteria;

(a) A violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes;

[Determination of Type] Native Crime Group, Intimidations, Type 5 (Native Intimidation)

[Scope of Recommendation] One year to two years of imprisonment (one year to two years of imprisonment for a basic area, and the lower limit is applicable.

Legal minimum applicable sentencing range shall depend on the applicable sentencing range)

B. Violation of each defamation crime, crime of interference with business, crime of violation of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Promotion Act

Since the sentencing criteria are not set, it shall be based on the lower limit of the sentence range in light of the sentencing criteria for the crime of violation of law (refinite crime, etc.) committed on the basis of the special crimes committed.

3. Determination of sentence: Imprisonment for 2 years; and

In light of the fact that the Defendant committed each of the instant crimes for the purpose of retaliation against the victim from the time immediately after the period of suspension of execution was over, even though he was sentenced to a suspended one year of imprisonment due to indecent act by force against the victim, and that the victim suffers from depression due to the continuous intimidation of the Defendant, it is necessary to punish the Defendant solemnly.

However, in consideration of the favorable circumstances, the fact that the defendant repents the defendant's wrong and is going to not have access to or contact with the victim in the future, etc., the punishment as ordered shall be determined.

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.

Judges Ahn Byung-chul

Red leapn

Judges Jeon Soo-soo

List of Offenses

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.