logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 2020.01.21 2019노1987
경범죄처벌법위반
Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. According to the summary of the grounds for appeal, according to the applicable provisions of the facts charged in this case, the act of “scambling disturbance, etc.” is stipulated as “a very rough and disorderly words or actions, scambling others without any justifiable reasons,” and thus, the act per se of the applicable provisions of this case is specified. However, under different premise, the court below's dismissal of prosecution against the facts charged in this case is erroneous in the misapprehension

2. Determination

A. The summary of the instant facts charged was around 02:36 September 1, 2016, the Defendant committed an act, such as disturbance of drinking alcohol under Article 3(1)20 of the Punishment of Minor Offenses Act at the C convenience store located in Jinju-si.

B. On the grounds indicated in its reasoning, the lower court rejected the instant public prosecution on the grounds that the Defendant did not indicate how to commit any act among the constituent elements of Article 3(1)20 of the Punishment of Minor Offenses Act in the written request for summary judgment of this case.

C. According to Article 3(1)20 of the Punishment of Minor Offenses Act, “a person who, under the influence of alcohol, is punished by a fine not exceeding KRW 100,00,00,00, or a fine for negligence, or a fine for negligence, is imposed on another person by uttering or doing rough words or conducts in a riotous manner in a place where many people gather or frequent, such as a public hall, theater, restaurant, etc., or on a train, motor vehicle, ship, etc., on which many people are aboard.” The facts charged in the instant case are stated only in the name of the date and place of the crime, but only in the case of the method of the crime, the specific facts are stated only in the name of the “act, such as disturbance, etc.,” which falls under the title of the above constituent elements. In other words, whether the Defendant, by doing any act, has slicked or bread on another person under the influence of alcohol.

arrow