logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 거창지원 2016.06.23 2016고합13
특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(보복협박등)등
Text

The punishment of the accused shall be determined by eight months of imprisonment.

However, the above sentence shall be executed for a period of two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The defendant was the victim B (V, 51 years old) and about five years of experience.

1. On March 29, 2016, the Defendant violated a residence: (a) around 06:10, around 06:10, the victim was demanded to take a hedging before the victim’s residence located in Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun; (b) and (c) the victim was aware of his/her personal identification number without the victim’s consent; (d) the victim was released from the victim’s personal identification number without the victim’s consent; and (e) the victim was released from the victim’s personal identification number; (e) the victim

2. Violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Intimidation, etc.);

A. The Defendant committing a crime on March 30, 2016

3. 30. 18:51 around 30. 18:51, on the ground that the victim reported the victim's residential intrusion to the police of the defendant, such as paragraph 1, to E member working for the injured party in Gyeongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Gyeongnam-gun, the victim was "Chewing."

Hahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhn

“Intimidating the victim”, the victim was threatened.

B. On March 31, 2016, the Defendant, who committed the crime of March 31, 2016, called “a request to withdraw a complaint” by phoneing the victim to the victim at the Defendant’s residence located in 111 and 204 Dongdong F apartment of 111, Dong-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gu, Seoul on March 31, 2016, but, upon the victim’s refusal to do so, the Defendant would be rashing the victim by citing the front door box.

It is expected that the workplace will be closed.

We have threatened the victim by stipulating how the way is prone.”

Accordingly, the defendant threatened the victim who provided investigation proviso in relation to his criminal case more than twice in total with the purpose of retaliation.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes in which statements made by the police are entered in B;

1. Relevant Articles of the Criminal Act and Article 319(1) of the Criminal Act regarding criminal facts (the point of intrusion upon residence and the choice of imprisonment) and each specific crime.

arrow