(영문) 수원지방법원 안산지원 2016.10.21 2016고정1140

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 안산지원 2016.10.21 2016고정1140

협박

Text

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

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Reasons

Criminal facts

On July 8, 2016, around 21:10, the Defendant expressed the attitude that the victim C, who is the same resident, would have been threatened with harm to the body of the victim, such as threatening him/her to receive his/her personal information at a corner and threaten him/her to drink, and threaten him/her to drink.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. C’s legal statement;

1. Statement to C by the police;

1. The defendant asserts that the video CD [the defendant] means that he had no intention to stick out from the elevator after getting on the elevator, and that he tried not to stick to C, or that he intended to do so. In other words, the following circumstances acknowledged by each of the above evidence: ① the victim C is consistent from the investigative agency to this court; ② the defendant stated that he consistently in this court; ② the defendant tried to break out his hand in the elevator; ② according to the elevator CCTV image, according to the circumstances where the defendant faces the victim, he could sufficiently recognize the fact of threatening the victim as stated in its reasoning; the defendant's argument is not reasonable in its application; ② the defendant's act is deemed to go outside the elevator camera regardless of the direction where the victim faces the victim; and ② according to the elevator CCTV image, it is recognized that the defendant acted in the manner where the victim faces the victim.

1. Relevant Article 283(1) of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts, the choice of a sentence, and the choice of a fine (in spite of the absence of recovery from damage until the job, considering that the defendant is not the same as the previous one);

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

1. Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order;

1. It is so decided as per Disposition on the grounds of Article 186(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act or more.

참조조문

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2018.08.30 2018고정1071

-수원지방법원 안산지원 2014.04.16 2013고정2153

-수원지방법원 안산지원 2015.03.04 2014고단2284

-수원지방법원 안산지원 2016.10.19 2016고단1776

-수원지방법원 안산지원 2015.06.10 2015고단527