logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2019.07.19 2019고합219
특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(보복폭행등)등
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. On May 21, 2019, around 13:40 on May 21, 2019, the Defendant interfered with the business of the victim B, the Defendant: (a) entered the victim’s “D’s clothes” store operated by the victim B in Guro-gu Seoul Metropolitan City, and (b) obstructed the victim’s business operation by force for about 10 minutes, by stating that the victim said that the victim said the victim was “satisa,” the victim was “satis,” and that “satis,” the victim was “satis, satis, satis, and satis,” and that the victim’s business operation was obstructed by force.

2. The Defendant violated the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Refluence, etc.) and the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Refluence, etc.) committed an act of disturbance as referred to in paragraph (1) against the victim F (E) who is an employee of the said “E,” a rice sales store adjacent to the above “D,” at the same time and at the same place as indicated in paragraph (1) of this Article, with a defect in the Defendant’s report to the police, and for the purpose of retaliationing with a malicious sentiment, the victim’s cryp, such as “E,” which reads, “the victim,” who is the victim’s chest part of the victim’s chest, was tighted twice by shouldering, etc., and continued to use the victim’s face on one occasion with the victim’s hand, and “the victim’s knife and knife will be used in this part.”

As a result, the defendant reported the proviso to the police in relation to the investigation or trial of his criminal case, and threatened the victim with the purpose of retaliation against the victim who provided investigation.

3. The Defendant’s interference with the business of the Victim F, as described in paragraph 2, should be referred to as “the victim” in the above “E”, which is a rice sales store for the victim’s employees, around May 21, 2019, when the Victim F reported to the police.

arrow