logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 성남지원 2016.11.30 2016고정508
특수협박
Text

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

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, the amount of KRW 100,000 shall be paid.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a person who engages in construction business.

On November 6, 2015, the Defendant, around 04:21, 04:21, on the road along which a two-way road in the Seocho-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City is along with a two-way road between Sungnam-gu and Sungnam-gu, on the ground that the vehicle (D) operated by the injured party C (the injured party, 47 years of age and south) is operated in a dry scale, and thereafter, the injured party’s vehicle was forced to go back by raising the vehicle to SM7 (E) in the Defendant’s SM7 (E) and then the injured party’s vehicle was forced to go back on two occasions.

Summary of Evidence

1. The defendant's partial statement in court;

1. According to the above black image as to whether a notice of harm and threat on the screen CD is intentional, it is recognized that the defendant carried the right side to the right side of the victim's vehicle after leaving the victim's vehicle in the future and followed the balke twice at intervals of 3 seconds. Since the defendant did not have any reason to act as above, and there was no other vehicle driving on the two-lanes at the time, there was no need to stick again to two-lanes if he thought the damaged vehicle.

Since the defendant did not have an explanation to be able to receive this, the defendant's first assertion of difficulty cannot be accepted for the following reasons.

Although the Defendant vindicates that he was aware that the headlight and the opening, etc. all were obstacles in the front of the failure with respect to the situation of the first hub, he can only be seen as having turned on the front side of the Defendant, even though he did not find any obstacles on the screen of the black box, rather he did not find the obstacles on the screen.

Next, with regard to the situation in which the second hub was followed, the defendant was trying to confirm the object taken by the motor vehicle, but such a vindication does not in itself speak but does not seem to take any object by the black image.

arrow