(영문) 전주지방법원 2014.08.22 2014노78 | 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) 전주지방법원 2014.08.22 2014노78

업무방해

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,000,000.

The defendant does not pay the above fine.

Reasons

1. The gist of the grounds of appeal by the prosecutor is as follows: (a) the Defendant’s cancellation of business registration by reporting the closure of general restaurants with the trade name “H” where the Victim G was operated; (b) the victim was unable to run the restaurant business; and (c) the victim cannot be deemed to have explicitly or implicitly consented to the closure of business; (d) the Defendant’s act of reporting the closure of business constitutes the crime of interference with business by force; and (c) the Defendant’s act of unilaterally cancelling

The judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant of a lack of illegality as a legitimate act, which is a reasonable act that is reasonable to the extent of social norms or acceptable, is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. The facts charged and the summary of the Defendant’s assertion

A. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is the person who operates a gold bank in the following City D.

On May 5, 2011, the Defendant completed the business registration of the injured party G G general restaurant located in the F in the Hasan-si in the name of the Defendant.

After that, around April 30, 2013, the Defendant arbitrarily reported the closure of the above HH general restaurant business and cancelled its business registration, thereby obstructing the victim’s work by force.

B. The Defendant asserts that: (a) the Defendant’s summary of the Defendant’s assertion asserts that: (b) the Defendant notified the victim of his intent to report the closure of business; and (c) the victim did not raise any objection thereto; (b) the Defendant reported the closure of business with the victim’s explicit or implied consent; and (b) the sub-lease contract between the Defendant and the victim was lawfully terminated, and thus

3. The judgment of the court below

A. The lower court is based on the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court.

유사 판례

-전주지방법원 군산지원 2014.01.07 2013고정580

-인천지방법원 2014.03.21 2013고정3130

-대법원 1983. 10. 11. 선고 83도983 판결

-부산지방법원 2015.09.16 2015구단20835

-부산지방법원 2015.11.26 2013가단101117