(영문) 부산지방법원 2018.05.03 2017노2183 | 리걸엔진

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 부산지방법원 2018.05.03 2017노2183

업무방해등

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by a fine of 500,000 won.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

Reasons

1. As to the part concerning interference with the main part of the grounds for appeal, the Defendant did not interfere with the business of the victim D, and as to defamation part E is a victim, there is no performance, and for the purpose of public interest, the crime of defamation cannot be established against the Defendant.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below convicting each of the facts charged of this case is erroneous by misapprehending the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. On July 5, 2015, the Defendant, from around 16:00 on July 5, 2015 to 17:00 on the same day, was entirely replaced by the Defendant on the ground that the victim D did not repay the Defendant’s obligation within the Korean Corporate Economic EXPO within the veckco located in the Busan Shipping Daegu Do, Busan.

“Along with 10 persons wishing to purchase a product of the victimized party by sound, they interfere with their business affairs for one hour by force by preventing them from purchasing the product.

2) The lower court found the witness D’s legal statement as evidence to be guilty of this part of the facts charged.

3) The first instance judgment on the credibility of a witness’s statement made by the first instance court of the first instance was clearly erroneous.

In exceptional cases where it is deemed significantly unfair to maintain the first instance judgment on the credibility of the statement made by a witness of the first instance court, based on the results of the first instance examination and the results of the further examination of evidence conducted until the closing of the appellate trial, the appellate court may render a different judgment on the credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance trial (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 201Do5313, Jun. 14, 2012). In full view of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, seven employees of D’s business start-up team H were promoting the company.

참조판례

-대법원 2012. 6. 14. 선고 2011도5313 판결

유사 판례

-서울북부지방법원 2018.09.21 2018노1171

-전주지방법원 2018.01.18 2017노1450

-전주지방법원 2017.01.12 2016노954

-부산지방법원 2017.08.18 2016노5133

-광주지방법원 2018.12.05 2018노2802