(영문) 부산지방법원 2020.02.06 2019노3322 | 리걸엔진

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) 부산지방법원 2020.02.06 2019노3322

업무방해등

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (the factual error, the violation of law, and the unreasonable sentencing) does not constitute interference with the business by simple vagabonds.

Victims C, G, and I were not insultd.

Police officers did not smuggling their chest, and even if they did not commit the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties, they do not constitute violence.

The amount of punishment (six months of imprisonment) determined is unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to evidence duly adopted by the lower court to determine the part concerning obstruction of business, 1) 1) misunderstanding of facts and violation of law, according to evidence duly adopted by the lower court and the examination of evidence, the Defendant was found to have avoided the disturbance of 30 minutes from the D cafeteria operated by the victim C. The Defendant’s act constitutes an act that interferes with the victim’s restaurant business by force. There is no error in the lower judgment that found the Defendant guilty of interference with business, or in violation of the laws related to the crime of interference with business, thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment. 2) According to evidence duly adopted by the lower court, the lower court’s judgment as to the insult portion was examined and finished evidence, the Defendant is deemed to have “I Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y YY Y Y Y Y YY Y Y Y Y.

The defendant's act is an expression of sacrific sentiment that could undermine the social evaluation of the victims in consideration of the situation at the time.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2016Do9674, Oct. 13, 2016). In so doing, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the facts charged of insult or by exceeding the law related to the offense of insult, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

3) The lower court duly adopted the facts of recognition as to the obstruction of performance of official duties.

참조판례

-대법원 2016. 10. 13. 선고 2016도9674 판결

유사 판례

-부산지방법원 2019.12.19 2019노3266

-부산지방법원 동부지원 2019.09.25 2019고단267

-울산지방법원 2014.03.28 2014고정151

-춘천지방법원 2015.07.16 2015고단494

-울산지방법원 2013.10.24 2013고단2706