beta
Text
Defendant
A shall be punished by a fine for negligence of KRW 2,000,000, and by a fine of KRW 1,500,000.
The Defendants respectively.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
Defendant A, on May 201, 201, brought a stone to obstruct J’s vehicle traffic on the access roads of 4 meters wide from the Hancheon-gun, Hongcheon-gun, which are adjacent to the Defendant’s Hancheon-gun’s H on May 1, 201. On the following day, Defendant A brought 5 and her stones on a road of 4.5 meters wide in the HW width, thereby hindering the traffic of vehicles operated by J, etc.
"2011 High Court 767"
1. In fact, Defendant A is a person in a de facto marital relationship with L, which is the actual owner of the land in Hongcheon-gun K in Gangwon, and Defendant B purchased from N, who is the father of the J, the father of the J, who resides in the same village in the land and the above ground buildings in the Hancheon-gun, Hongcheon-gun.
J is a person who has been engaged in agricultural works, such as cultivating charges, using roads through which many and unspecified people, who had been established in the above K, by leasing land of Hongcheon-gun Q from P, which is about four years ago, a wood company of the OG, and is engaged in agricultural works, such as cultivating charges.
Defendant
A demanded the J not to cultivate the above K and the same ri S land owned by the R, but was rejected, and there was a complaint against this. Defendant B was dissatisfied with the civil litigation in relation to the purchase of real property from the above N.
2. In order to prevent the Defendants from forming a farmer in the above Q land, Defendant A, around 09:00 on May 13, 201, constructed a road of 4 meters wide from the above Q land into a dry field, using a refacing season, etc. with a road of 4 meters wide from the above Q land, and Defendant B installed a lock on the steel door installed on the same day on the same day.
As a result, the Defendants conspired to obstruct traffic by using land used by many and unspecified persons, and at the same time interfered with the activities of the victimJ such as harvesting crops by force.
Summary of Evidence
"2011 High Court 683"
1. The defendant A's partial statement in the second protocol of trial;
1. 4 times;