(영문) 대구지방법원 2016.06.15 2015고정2695

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) 대구지방법원 2016.06.15 2015고정2695

건조물침입

Text

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

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

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

From around 2010 to March 16, 2015, the Defendant operated a singing practice hall on the second floor of the building located in Daegu-gu Dong-gu, Daegu-gu, and was ordered by a court judgment around March 16, 2015. Around March 16, 2015, the Defendant was aware of the fact that the victim and his denial were residing in the said building, other than the Defendant, and the victim was set up a door on the first floor of the building to prevent the entry of the said building by the general public.

1. On March 17, 2015, around 06:16, the Defendant opened a door on the first floor of the above building and intruded into another’s building.

2. On March 20, 2015, around 05:51, the Defendant opened a door on the first floor of the above building and intruded into another’s building.

3. On March 25, 2015, around 15:50, the Defendant opened a door on the first floor of the above building and intruded into another’s building.

Summary of Evidence

1. Part of the defendant's legal statements;

1. Protocols of examination of the witness to D of this court;

1. Part of the statement under E in the second police interrogation protocol against the accused;

1. In the investigation report (Attachment to On-the-spot), CCTV images (in the crime of intrusion upon residence, the term "influence" is sufficient to enter and leave against the will of the resident or the victim, and there is no need to obtain any resistance. Even at an open place, the manager may prohibit or restrict the entry when necessary, so if the person enters the premises of the residence or building unreasonably contrary to the intention of prohibiting or restricting the entry, the crime of intrusion upon residence constitutes a crime of intrusion (see Supreme Court Decision 82Do1363, Mar. 8, 1983, etc.). However, according to the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court, the evidence duly adopted and investigated, the victim was living on the fourth floor of the instant building owned by the victim, and the defendant used the second floor as a singing practice site, and the dispute over the lease contract between the defendant and the victim was finally pending for a long time, the victim is a civil lawsuit and the victim.

참조판례

-대법원 1983. 3. 8. 선고 82도1363 판결

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2018.07.12 2018고정1119

-대구지방법원 서부지원 2018.04.25 2017고단1561

-수원지방법원 평택지원 2018.09.21 2018고단1264

-서울서부지방법원 2018.05.29 2017고정945

-수원지방법원 성남지원 2017.05.11 2016고정1314