logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2014.01.16 2013고정2860
업무방해등
Text

Defendant

A KRW 1,000,000, Defendant B’s fine of KRW 700,00,000, Defendant C and D respectively.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

Defendants are working for the street cleaners of each H Workers' Union.

1. The Defendants’ obstruction of duties on August 22, 2012 from around 06:30 to around 09:00 on August 22, 2012, 2012, on the grounds that the Defendant’s victim K, who left the H trade union, was temporarily temporarily laid off due to a bridge operation, and attempted to return to the district where L, which is the H trade union affiliated with the H trade union, was in charge of cleaning and clean up the victim. The Defendants, along with the street cleaners affiliated with the H trade union affiliated with the 20th H trade union, did not work “the victim,” and “the victim,” and “the victim, we have to come to our mind. Whether we have come to be in place with the same leg,” and “I have taken place with the same leg, whether we have come to take place with the same leg, and whether we have come to take a bath at now, and the victim could not take up the victim by means of cleaning it.

As a result, the Defendants conspired to interfere with the cleaning of the victim by force.

2. On August 24, 2012, Defendant B interfered with the business of Defendant A, B, D, and E from August 24, 2012 to August 06:30 of the same day, Defendant B took the place specified in paragraph (1), and took the cleaning tool used by the victim K while taking a bath to the victim K, and Defendant D took the cleaning tool. Defendant D took the cleaning tool and combine it with the street cleaners belonging to the H trade union in the name of Defendant A, Defendant E, and Defendant E, together with the street cleaners belonging to the H trade union in the name of 10, took the bath around the victim, and prevented the victim from cleaning in the manner of seen above.

As a result, the Defendants conspired to interfere with the cleaning of the victim by force.

3. Defendant A’s interference with the business of August 27, 2012, and the insult Defendant: (a) from around 06:30 on August 27, 2012 to around 07:0 on the same day, in the situation where there are street cleanerss affiliated with M and H trade unions, the victim K.

arrow