logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2019.06.20 2019고정515
재물손괴등
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

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

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

A victim B leased the first floor commercial building in Seongbuk-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “instant commercial building”) from D and operated the store “E” in the said commercial building, and the Defendant purchased the instant commercial building from D around May 31, 2018.

1. Damage to property;

A. On June 21, 2018, the Defendant requested the victim to leave the instant commercial building on or around 13:00, but the victim did not leave as a matter of deposit with D, the Defendant removed one signboard E-ray owned by the victim through the removal business entity, and damaged the victim’s property due to the market price by well setting up the telephone line, Internet line, and television line connected with the said store.

B. On June 27, 2018, the Defendant: (a) at the same place as the preceding paragraph, at around 19:00, damaged the Internet line connected with the above store and the victim’s scambling house; and (b) on the same day, the Defendant continued to connect the victim’s husband with the television line, thereby damaging the victim’s market value.

C. At around 11:00 on June 28, 2018, the Defendant damaged the market price of the victim’s property by shouldering four glass, such as the entrance and front glass owned by the victim in the above E, and the front glass.

2. Around 19:00 on June 28, 2018, the Defendant: (a) obstructed the building; (b) obstructed the structure under the victim’s control by replacing the locked system of the entrance door of the E store; and (c) entering the said store without permission.

3. Around 11:00 on June 28, 2018, the Defendant interfered with the business, at the above E store operated by the victim, 4 of glass, such as the entrance and front glass, such as the entrance and front glass, was shouldered, and around 19:00 on the same day, the Defendant was unable to enter the said store containing the victim’s tool, etc.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the victim's business by force.

Summary of Evidence

1. Part of the defendant;

arrow