logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2017.08.10 2016노1830
재물손괴등
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In light of the fact-misunderstanding and legal principles as to the point of property damage: (a) the building indicated in the facts charged (hereinafter “instant building”) was in the state where there was no person who actually uses it at the time; (b) the Defendant committed an act identical to the facts charged for the purpose of exercising the right of retention because it did not receive construction cost as to the instant building; and (c) the cost of restoring the damaged glass was merely approximately KRW 30,000,000,000,000 won, due to the Defendant’s act under this part of this case, thereby impairing the utility of the glass window

not, but not.

Even if the defendant's act constitutes a legitimate act or self-help, it is not illegal.

2) Regarding the obstruction of business, the victims had lawfully occupied the building of this case at the time of the defendant's act on this part.

On the other hand, the Defendant cannot be seen as exercising a legitimate right of retention on the instant building, and thus, this part of the Defendant’s act cannot be deemed as constituting the element of the crime of interference with business.

Even if the defendant's act constitutes a legitimate act or self-help, it is not illegal.

B. The sentence sentenced by the court below to the defendant (the imprisonment of eight months, the suspension of the execution of two years, the community service) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Judgment 1 on the misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles is established as to the crime of damage to property under Article 366 of the Criminal Act. The crime of damage to property under Article 366 of the Criminal Act is established when the property of another person is damaged or concealed or damaged its utility is damaged by other means. Here, the term "procing the utility of property" refers, in fact, to make the property in a state in which it cannot be used for its original purpose due to an appraisal, and it includes making the property in a state in which it cannot be used temporarily, and in particular, a letter of falling on the wall of a structure

arrow