logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 전주지방법원 2019.08.21 2019고정161
업무방해등
Text

A defendant shall be punished by a fine of 500,000 won.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. On November 4, 2018, from around 20:20 to 20:45 on the same day, the Defendant obstructed the victim’s restaurant business by avoiding disturbance, i.e., selling alcoholic beverages from “D operated by the victim C (n, 43 years of age)” to the victim, who listens to the Defendant’s speech that he would not sell alcoholic beverages from the victim by smoking the disturbance. The Defendant, “I will sell alcoholic beverages with the intention of the victim,” and continuously obstructed the victim’s restaurant’s restaurant business by force by avoiding disturbance, such as holding the call sign continuously to transfer the table.

2. Refusal to eviction;

A. On November 4, 2018, the Defendant received a demand from the said victim to interfere with the aforementioned business at the time and place specified in paragraph (1).

However, the defendant does not respond to it, and until the police officer dispatched by the report of the victim on the same day arrives, he/she is seated in the restaurant of the victim, and he/she leaves the victim's place without justifiable grounds.

The Gu refused to comply with the Gu.

B. On December 10, 2018, the Defendant, at the place specified in paragraph (1) around 20:10 on December 10, 2018, demanded the victim E (the age of 47) who jointly operates the above restaurant to provide alcohol, and received a demand for delivery from the victim on the ground that he/she would drink alcohol, take a bath for drinking alcohol, or booms his/her happiness.

However, the defendant does not respond to it, and until the police officer dispatched by the report of the victim on the same day arrives, he/she is seated in the restaurant of the victim, and he/she leaves the victim's place without justifiable grounds.

The Gu refused to comply with the Gu.

Summary of Evidence

1. The police officer's interrogation protocol of the accused on December 18, 2018

1. Application of each police protocol of statement to C and E;

1. Relevant Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 314(2) and (1) of the Criminal Act, Article 319(2) and (1) of the Criminal Act, and the selection of fines for a crime;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2 and Article 50 of the Criminal Act shall apply to concurrent crimes;

arrow