beta
Text
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendant
A A Fines of 3,00,000 won, Defendant B and C of each fine of 1,00,000,000 won.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendant A, B, and D (misunderstanding of facts and legal principles) (1) are limited to the former Korean power, and the Defendants are obligated to supply electricity by giving electricity to the stores of the victims who did not pay the electricity fee, while paying unpaid electricity fee, and there is no obligation to supply electricity to the stores of the victims who did not pay the electricity fee. As such, the Defendants did not make a transfer to the victims’ stores.
② On August 22, 2013, H’s store: (a) removed electric power lines from this Es. Es.S. room (hereinafter “electric room”); and (b) removed electric power lines from the power plant to the power generator; (c) supply electricity on August 26, 2013 was not possible; (b) around August 29, 2013, the victims were supplied electricity by destroying the electric lock system and setting the electric lock system by themselves.
④ Also, the Defendants’ act is an inevitable measure that was conducted by the resolution of a lawful emergency countermeasure meeting for the efficient management of buildings and the interests of the entire sectional owners, and thus constitutes a justifiable act.
Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which convicted this part of the facts charged (Article 1 of the facts charged) is erroneous by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.
B. Defendant A (misunderstanding of facts, misunderstanding of legal principles) ① The victim H’s store is divided into mother and child, so that H separately pays electricity charges to Korean power. Since the victim did not pay electricity charges, it was cut off by Korean power from March 2014, the above temporary date and time was not broken down by the Defendant’s act, but rather constituted a victim’s understanding or consent or a legitimate act because the victim’s store was conducted by agreement, which is a legally concluded contract between the victim H and the victim’s free will.
Nevertheless, this.