(영문) 대구지방법원 2014.06.27 2014노6 | 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) 대구지방법원 2014.06.27 2014노6

공갈등

Text

The judgment below

The part of the crime of Nos. 1 through 3 of the judgment, and No. 4 of the provisional crime shall be reversed.

The above crimes are committed against the defendant.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. (1) The Defendant did not force AD to misunderstand facts, and instead, AD arbitrarily enters claims on the list of “AE amount of claims and remaining construction amount by type of work” in order to work against the lien holder by using the Defendant.

B. The sentence of unfair sentencing (the crime of paragraphs 1 through 3 at the time of the board, the crime of No. 4: imprisonment with prison labor for three years, and the crime of No. 4-b in the decision: a fine of one million won) of the lower court is excessively unreasonable.

B. The lower court’s above sentence is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The court below rejected the Defendant’s assertion in detail on the grounds that the Defendant alleged the same content as the grounds for appeal in this part of the judgment of the court below, and the court below stated in detail the Defendant’s assertion and its judgment in the relevant part under the title of “determination on the Defendant’s and his defense counsel’s assertion.” In comparison with the above judgment of the court below, the court below is just and acceptable, and the witness AV stated that the Defendant continuously requested AE type of work and the office was difficult to find out, and the victim AV, who was an organized violence double at ordinary times, had the Defendant two items of the victim AV, who was an organized violence. If the Defendant’s demand at the time of the instant case appears to have been frighted with fear of causing harm from the Defendant, the court below did not err by misunderstanding the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

B. As to the assertion of unfair sentencing on the Defendant and prosecutor’s assertion of unfair sentencing (i.e., Articles 1 through 3, 4, and each of the Defendant and prosecutor’s respective arguments of unfair sentencing on the Defendant and prosecutor’s charges, the Defendant, as well as his/her own perception of organized violence, has the right to intervene in

유사 판례

-대구지방법원 2013.12.20 2012노4160

-의정부지방법원 2019.01.08 2018노1819

-수원지방법원 2020.10.16 2020노2998

-부산지방법원 2013.01.31 2012노3223

-창원지방법원 통영지원 2019.09.23 2019고단12