logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원동부지원 2020.09.25 2020고정64
업무방해
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

On September 20, 2019, from around October 20, 2019 to around October 4, 2010 of the same year, the Defendant obstructed the victim’s business by force by installing a steel fence at the entrance of the victim’s shop and making it difficult for the victim to enter the entrance, on the ground that the victim left the entrance leading up to the second floor of the Defendant’s building while conducting funeral services.

Summary of Evidence

C, E and F’s written statement statement investigation report (on-site photographs, field investigations, etc.) on each of the legal statements C and F [the installation of a steel fence with a view to making it difficult for the Defendant to enter the entrance of the victim’s stores constitutes force of interference with business by suppressing and mixing a person’s free will. Even if the Defendant had the purpose of obstructing the Defendant’s free passage by installing a gate, etc. at the entrance of the Defendant’s building, it is difficult to view that the Defendant’s use of a steel fence to make it difficult for the Defendant to enter the victim’s upper right by installing the gate as above constitutes a legitimate act or self-defense because it does not meet the requirements of reasonableness, urgency, and supplement of means or methods, and thus, constitutes legitimate act

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act and Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment;

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

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order is considerable; the period in which the defendant installed the pentice; the victim's inconvenience was found to occur; however, the victim is likely to have trouble in running his business. However, considering the fact that this case occurred by piling the goods at the defendant's entrance, the defendant removed the pentice and the primary offender, the punishment is determined as per the order.

arrow