logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.08.20 2015고정1196
협박
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of three million won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

Around April 2012, the Defendant came to know of the victim C (n, 27 years of age) at the carmerat-related site, and taken gender-related pages with sexual intercourse. In conclusion, the Defendant came to be hedging with the victim.

Although the Defendant became aware of the fact that the victim had already returned to a new male-friendly Do, and the victim asked the Defendant to inform the male-friendly Do of the fact that he had sexual intercourse, the victim respondeds to the fact that the victim had not been able to report the fact that he had sexual intercourse with D, and then, around 02:0 on August 8, 2014, the Defendant’s house located in Dongjak-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government E to F and kept the images of the victim’s sexual sexual behavior taken by the victim and kept in custody, and the victim threatened the victim with the photographed images and photographs of the victim’s sexual intercourse.

Summary of Evidence

1. Each legal statement of witness C and D;

1. Statement to C by the police;

1. Written confirmations of C and G, D, G, H, I, J, K, and L; and

1. A complaint;

1. The police seizure record and the list of seizure;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to M bulletin board, language, or reading room rooms;

1. Relevant Article of the Criminal Act and Article 283 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The Defendant and his defense counsel asserted that the Defendant’s act constitutes a justifiable act in light of the various circumstances in which the Defendant written the instant text, etc., the Defendant and his defense counsel asserted to the effect that the Defendant’s act constitutes a wrongful act. However, in light of the overall contents, phrases and methods of expression, relationship between the Defendant, the victim, and D, and the motive and purpose of the Defendant written the said text at the time of the instant case.

arrow