logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2014.12.08 2014고단3427
주거침입등
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for three years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. On July 31, 2014, at around 14:00, the Defendant was in front of the house of the victim D(M, 49 years old) of the Daejeon Seo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (Seoul Metropolitan Government Dalla 102, and the victim D, who was the former wife, was aware that he/she provided a teaching system with E immediately after the divorce, and went into the dwelling room of the victim by dividing the victim's head of the house, thereby infringing upon the victim's house.

2. Around 14:00 on July 31, 2014, the Defendant collected hack pipe, which is a dangerous object located at the victim’s home of the Daejeon Seo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (Seoul Metropolitan Government) A. 102, and tried to gather hack pipe for the victim D and the victim E (the victim E (the victim is 50 years of age). The Defendant hacked the hack pipe, which is a dangerous object in the victim’s house kitchen, and tried to inflict harm to the victim E by gathering the hack pipe from the victim’s house, which is a dangerous object in the victim’s kitchen.

Accordingly, the defendant carried dangerous objects and threatened victims.

3. On August 19, 2014, the Defendant attempted to attack the victim E at the Gart parking lot located in Chungcheongnamnam F, stating that “A victim E has a DNA photo and sexual relation video, and if a week is 20 million won, he/she will delete the above photograph and video.” On the same day, the Defendant continued to demand a victim to turn off the victim by phone at around 20:14 on the same day, and after demanding the victim to turn off the victim, “A victim may do so with a money of KRW 30 million and with an inner or maternal phone, so that it would not know that it would be possible to break out without contact.”

The Defendant, as above, forced the victim to attack and withdraw money from the frighten victim, but did not comply with the intent of the victim and did not commit an attempted crime.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of each police statement of D and E;

1. Statement of police seizure;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to each investigation report (including each accompanying document);

1. Relevant Articles of the Act and punishment concerning the facts constituting the crime;

arrow