(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.07.10 2015노343

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) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.07.10 2015노343

폭행등

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Regarding interference with the business of a bank, the defendant only resisted the bank's unfair business operations and did not interfere with the bank's business operations.

B. On the part of the assault, the victim F obstructed the defendant's wheelchairs so that the victim F interfered with the defendant's career and legitimate civil petition system, and the defendant did not assault the victim.

2. Determination

A. As to the crime of interference with business as to the crime of interference with business, the force of the crime of interference with business is a single force capable of suppressing and mixing a person’s free will, regardless of whether it is either tangible or intangible. As such, not only violence, intimidation, but also social, economic, political status and pressure based on royalty, etc. are included therein, and such acts may also include acts that make it impossible or considerably difficult for the person to freely act by creating a sufficient condition to suppress a person’s free will.

In addition, the establishment of the crime of interference with business is not required to actually cause the result of interference with business, but it is sufficient to cause the risk of causing the result of interference with business.

According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court, the Defendant, at the instant bank from July 28, 2014 to 16:00, can be found to have avoided disturbance for about one hour by: (a) having a sound from the instant bank to open an account; (b) having a seal affixed; and (c) having re-entered the bank at around 17:25 on July 28, 2014 to take a bath for five minutes; and (d) having not returned to the front of the front of the electric wheelchairs bank counter.

In light of these facts in light of the above legal principles, the defendant's act constitutes an act of interference with business by force, and thereby, it is sufficiently recognized that the act of the defendant has caused or is likely to cause a trouble to the business

This part of the defendant's assertion of mistake is without merit.

B. The evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below regarding the crime of assault, in particular.

유사 판례

-창원지방법원 2013.02.07 2012노1230

-대전지방법원 2014.08.28 2013노3208

-대전지방법원 2014.07.25 2014고정555

-의정부지방법원 2019.11.28 2018노2628

-제주지방법원 2020.07.23 2019노831