logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2014.11.19 2014고합265
통신비밀보호법위반
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months and suspension of qualifications for one year.

However, the above imprisonment for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

No person shall record a conversation between others that is not open to the public, except as provided by Acts and subordinate statutes.

Nevertheless, the defendant was doubtful that C had been in the past in the past is not having a usual male with a view to recording C’s dialogues.

On December 12, 2013, at around 20:50, the Defendant recorded a tape recorder prepared in advance between a toilet and his mother, etc., for approximately 403 minutes of dialogue between C and C, etc., by setting the tape recorder prepared in advance between a toilet and a toilet, at around 20:50.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. C’s legal statement;

1. Each police statement of C;

1. Seizure records;

1. Details of each mobile phone text;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a report on investigation (Attachment of On-Site photographs);

1. Articles 16(1)1 and 3(1) of the former Protection of Communications Secrets Act (Amended by Act No. 1229, Jan. 14, 2014) concerning criminal facts

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (The following extenuating circumstances among the reasons for sentencing);

1. Determination on the assertion by the defendant and his/her defense counsel under Article 48(1)1 of the Criminal Act

1. In order to avoid doubt of the wife after finding out of the Defendant’s office a tape recorder recorded with the summary of the argument, the tape recorder of this case shall be set up in C’s book c’s book c’s book c’s book c’s book

It is urgent that C did not speak about the situation of C, but C did not have any idea to record C’s conversation, and it was composed of a misunderstanding of a tape recorder and a misunderstanding of a tape recorder.

2. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court of this case, namely, the Defendant: (a) laid a recording of this case in the singing-to-sing-to-sing-to-sing-sing-to-s-to-s-to-s-to-s-to-s-to-s-to-s-to-s-to-s-to-s-s-to-s-to-s-s- to-s-to-s-to-s-s-to-s-

arrow