logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 서부지원 2014.02.14 2013고정824
업무방해등
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,500,000.

Where a defendant fails to pay a fine, 50,000 won shall be one day.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant entered into a partnership agreement with the victim C and the victim D on March 25, 2004 and operated the F Hospital from December 2004 to the Daegu Seo-gu E, Daegu, and terminated the above partnership agreement on January 15, 2012, and the victim G is the head of the secretariat of the above hospital.

1. Interference with business affairs of victims C and victims D;

A. On February 2012, 2012, the Defendant: (a) performed the operation room on the second floor of the above hospital; (b) on the ground that the medical aircraft company provided only medical equipment necessary for the surgery of the victims and provided medical equipment necessary for the surgery; (c) provided one “Reery T-Gometry X-Press” in an amount equivalent to 3.8 million won at the market price, which is an important accessory to the “Neination”, which is an organization for the inserting operations, kept at the same time; and (d) one “Reery Y-Gomets” in an amount equivalent to 3.8 million won at the market price; and (e) one “Bra LAB P inters and Angleds” in an amount equivalent to 2.6 million won at the market price, and prevented the victims from using them when performing the operation.

B. On February 2012, 2012, the Defendant: (a) reported the supply of an operation equipment to the victims for the surgery at the same place as the first paragraph of the first paragraph; and (b) obstructed the victims’ veterinary work by force by forcing the victims to infection of the disinfection equipment with the disinfection equipment for preventing infections by the operation equipment while “this article is laid down at the hospital as soon as possible; and (c) allowing the victims to use the disinfection equipment when performing the operation.”

C. On February 3, 2012, at the same place as paragraph 1(a), the Defendant reported the supply of the operating equipment to the victims for the surgery, and for the same reason as paragraph 1(a), and prevented the victims from using the equipment when the victims perform the surgery by using the disinfection equipment, which was sealed by the operation equipment in order to prevent infection of the operation equipment.

arrow