logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 성남지원 2013.06.28 2013고정516
동물보호법위반등
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,000,000.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won shall be one day.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant is a person who operates an open auction house in Gwangju City.

1. No person who violates the Animal Protection Act shall kill an animal by cruel means, such as hanging the animal;

Nevertheless, at around 13:40 on October 12, 2012, the Defendant: (a) received a request to butcher 25,000 won from E, a customer, from the warehouse installed at the back of the above open auction house; (b) died of electric shock by selling 1 ma, and (c) dismantled the said opening on the Do; and (d) dismantled the said body.

2. Slaughtering and treating livestock, collecting milk, and processing, packaging and storing livestock products shall be done at a place of business permitted;

Nevertheless, without obtaining permission from the competent authority, from December 2009 to October 12, 2012, the Defendant installed a type of escape arms, etc. used to remove the hair of large horses, food knife, chickens and ducks in the above warehouse, and slaughtered and disposed of livestock such as chickens and ducks.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. On-site photographs;

1. Application of seizure records and list statutes;

1. Articles 46 (1), 8 (1) 1 (in the case of killing animals by cruel methods) and 45 (1) 1 and 7 (1) of the Livestock Products Sanitary Control Act concerning facts constituting an offense (in the case of slaughter and treatment of livestock at an unauthorized place of work) of the relevant Act;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Determination as to the defendant's assertion under Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the confinement of a workhouse

1. The alleged defendant was dissatisfyed after the death of the meat dog and dissatisfyed to E upon the request from E to the effect that "I am to the elderly people". Thus, the defendant's act of killing a dog constitutes a legitimate act.

2. The Determination of the Animal Protection Act shall be necessary to properly protect and manage animals, such as the prevention of abuse against animals.

arrow