(영문) 수원지방법원 성남지원 2019.10.29 2019고정48

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) 수원지방법원 성남지원 2019.10.29 2019고정48

업무방해

Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of 300,000 won.

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

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

To the extent that it does not disadvantage the defendant's defense right, part of the facts charged shall be revised ex officio according to facts obtained through the examination of evidence without amendment procedures.

At around 23:10 on October 10, 2018, the Defendant opened the back door of the taxi in order to board the victim C's D taxi that had been located in front of Sungnam-si, Sungnam-si, but the victim opened a taxi that has not stopped, and provided the victim with a desire to take the back of the back of the taxi on the back of the string of the string of the string and walking the string of the string of the string of the string of the string of the string of the 2018.

Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with the victim's taxi operation by force.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. C’s legal statement;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes on blackbox CDs;

1. Relevant Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts, the choice of a fine, and the choice of a fine;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. Judgment on the assertion by the defendant and his/her defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. Although the alleged defendant took a bath for the victim, the defendant did not obstruct the victim's operation of the taxi by force, and there was no intention to interfere with his/her duties.

2. Determination

A. The crime of interference with business under Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act is established when a person interferes with another’s business by deceptive means or by force. The term “defensive force” in this context includes not only assault and intimidation, but also pressure by social, economic, political status and royalty (see Supreme Court Decision 2003Do504, Mar. 25, 2005). In addition, the crime of interference with business does not require the actual occurrence of interference with business, but also the result of interference with business.

참조조문

참조판례

-대법원 2005. 3. 25. 선고 2003도5004 판결

유사 판례

-의정부지방법원 2019.11.28 2018노2628

-수원지방법원 2019.11.15 2019노4091

-의정부지방법원 2015.05.22 2014노2354

-인천지방법원 2019.09.27 2019노513

-인천지방법원 2021.04.08 2020노4204