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
1. The Defendants’ joint crime committed in collusion with each other
A. From around 00:50 on December 5, 2017, 2017, Defendant B stated that “E” in front of the “E” operated by the victim F on the road in Suwon-si, Suwon-si, which was located in Suwon-si, was “A” and the victim said that “A shall not take the seat of the said taxi,” and Defendant A is expected to expect the said taxi’s beams, etc., on the ground that the facts charged are stated as “the front of the said taxi,” but as seen below, the Defendant is determined not to interfere with the Defendant’s exercise of defense, even if the correction was made, since the Defendant denied the fact of blocking the front of the taxi at the time of the instant case and testified on it.
By exercising power, approximately 10 minutes interfered with the taxi business of victims by exercising power.
B. At the date, time, and place indicated in the above paragraph (a) above property damage, Defendant B her string the string of the above string of the string of the string of the string of the string of the string of the string of the string of the string of the string of the string of the string of the string of the string of the string of the string of the string of the string of the string of the string of the string
In addition, the above taxi, which is the victim, was damaged to make it difficult for the victim to repair costs.
2. Defendant A assaulted Defendant A at the same date, time, and place, such as the above “1-A”, on one occasion the head of the Victim F (C).
Summary of Evidence
1. Part of the Defendants’ legal statements
1. Each legal statement of witness F and H;
1. A written statement;
1. Reports on internal investigation (on-site conditions, etc.) (excluding the part concerning H’s statement);
1. A photograph of taxi damage, I’s text photograph, and damaged photograph [Defendant A] does not have any fact of lying a victim’s taxi on the front door, or blocking the victim’s taxi from standing. Thus, Defendant B’s obstruction of business.