logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2018.07.06 2017노6897
재물손괴
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. It was true that the defendant arbitrarily removed the pressing installed in front of the victim's entrance. However, it is for the crime prevention of the building of this case and the safety of residents, which constitutes a justifiable act under Article 20 of the Criminal Act.

B. The lower court’s sentence (200,000 won) against an unfair defendant in sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) Determination as to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of the legal principles 1) "an act that does not violate social rules" under Article 20 of the Criminal Act refers to an act that can be accepted in light of the overall spirit of legal order or social ethics or social norms surrounding it. Thus, in order for a certain act to constitute a justifiable act, the requirements such as legitimacy of the motive or purpose of the act, reasonableness of the means or method of the act, balance between the legal protection and the legal interests of the law enforcement, urgency, and supplementary nature that there is no other means or method than the act (see Supreme Court Decision 2004Do8530, Feb. 25, 2005, etc.) shall be met (see Supreme Court Decision 2004Do8530, Feb. 25, 2005). In full view of the following circumstances revealed by evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below and the court below, it is difficult to view the Defendant's act to arbitrarily remove social ethics or social norms as stated in the facts charged in this case.

Therefore, this part of the defendant's argument is without merit.

(1) While the Defendant was disputing the issue of rent payment with the victim, CCTV was installed on the first floor of the instant building, and the CCTV was disfolded by the victim’s house entrance.

Dor, the defendant asserts that the building entrance was installed for legitimate purposes, such as monitoring the building entrance and maintaining crime prevention.

However, the reason why the defendant installed CCTV, the relationship between the defendant and the victim, 1.

arrow