209 Highest 2442 Business Obstruction, Violence (Revocation of Public Prosecution)

209 Highest 2683(Joint), Violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Drivers, Violence, etc.)

209 Highest 3272(combined) Gonggres

Park A (59 years of birth, male)

Maximum Constitution

Attorney Lee double-con

November 3, 2009

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

Criminal facts

On December 4, 2007, the Defendant was sentenced to one year in Busan District Court for a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes). On October 5, 2008, the Defendant completed the execution of the sentence in Busan Detention Center.

1. Interference with business;

From around 07:00 on March 20, 200 to 08:00, the Defendant obstructed the victim’s convenience store business by force by leaving the customers out of his/her free will, on the ground that he/she prevented the victim Kim C1 operated by the victim Kim C1, who was in his/her jurisdiction, from 07:0 on March 20, 200 to 08:0, he/she had his/her employees go against him/her who want to take the match before lurbing the lurbing. It is a lurf, but is a lurf, and the knurf is a knife, so that he/she can get his/her customers out of his/her knurb, and interfere with the victim’s convenience store business by force.

2. Violation of the Aggravated Punishment Act on Specific Crimes;

On May 31, 2009, the Defendant: (a) 08:05, the Defendant 3 was driven by the victim lowest c3, who was on board the top of the taxi belonging to the Busan 32 U.S. head of the Dong-gu, Busan 32 U.S., and, without any justifiable reason, she said 3 times the victim’s face is 24 crimes while driving the home fright road in the city of the Busan Y-gu, Busan Y-gu; (b) her face is 3 times with drinking, and her head is sponsed with the hand floor.

3. Injury;

On May 31, 2009, the Defendant: (a) loaded a taxi for business use operated by C3 at least 08:15:2. Around May 31, 2009; (b) arrived at the set of Samun apartment in Busan Seo-gu, Busan, and (c) caused the victim to go beyond the flabbbbing with her hand on the ground that the victim demands taxi charges; and (c) caused the victim to go beyond the flabing and pushed down the 10-day flabb, which requires treatment for about 10 days.

4. Magion;

At around 23:50 on June 19, 2009, the Defendant ordered the victim to drink the alcohol at a singing practice room operated by the victim Park Jong-gu, Busan Metropolitan City, using the fact that the Defendant would be subject to business suspension, and was punished, and the Defendant ordered the victim to drink the alcohol at the singing practice room. On June 20, 2009, around 01:50 on June 20, 2009, the Defendant ordered the above singing practice room to drink the alcohol value, and then ordered the victim to drink the alcohol value at the singing practice room, “The victim who was requested by the victim to drink the alcohol value at the instant singing practice room is not illegal.” The Defendant said that the Defendant was hume, “I will be able to drink the alcohol at the instant singing practice room.”

As above, the Defendant got the victim to attack, and let the victim frighted with 220,000 won pay a claim for the drinking value, etc., thereby acquiring pecuniary profits equivalent to the amount.

5. Bodily injury;

On June 20, 2009, the Defendant: (a) around 02:30 on June 20, 2009, at a singing practice room as indicated in the paragraph (4) around 02:30, and (b) around 4, 2009, the Defendant intending to go to a singing practice room without paying the drinking value, etc., and (c) the victim intending to go to a singing practice room, changing the drinking value, and (d) the victim was faced with a singing practice room stairs by pushing the Defendant, and (d) the victim was able to get the Defendant to board a taxi four times with his hand to get the cab, and (e) the victim was d

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Protocol concerning the examination of suspects by the prosecution concerning the maximum C5;

1. Statement made by the prosecution against c4;

1. Each police statement made with respect to Yellow C2, the lowest C3, and Park C4;

1. Seizure records;

1. A medical certificate of injury and a medical certificate;

1. Photographss, main receipts, field photographs, etc. of the upper part of the body;

1. Investigation report (the statement, etc. of the shootings);

1. Previous convictions: Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to inquire criminal records, investigation reports (a copy of the judgment, and confirmation of the date of release);

1. Article applicable to criminal facts;

Articles 314(1), 350(1), and 257(1) of the Criminal Act; Article 5-10(1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Options of Imprisonment)

1. Aggravation for repeated crimes;

Article 35 of the Criminal Act

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

Judgment on the assertion by defense counsel in the former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2, Article 50, and the proviso to Article 42 of the Criminal Act

The defense counsel asserts that not only the defendant was drunk at the time of each of the crimes in this case, but also the mental division increase, and that the defendant was in the state of mental disorder or mental disorder. Thus, according to the above evidence, the defendant's oral drinking at the time of each of the crimes in this case, but it cannot be deemed that the defendant did not have the ability to discern things or make decisions, even though he was aware that there was symptoms such as the disorder of emotional distress and the disorder of emotional stability, etc., and therefore, the above assertion by the defense counsel is rejected.

Judges Han Han-Gyeong