(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2016.12.08 2016노1787

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) 서울남부지방법원 2016.12.08 2016노1787

특수방실침입등

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. 1) Claim for misunderstanding of facts reveals that the facts recorded in the indictment concerning the intrusion of a special structure are acknowledged. However, the location of the case was a place where anyone can freely access if the victim was the victim, even if the defendant was able to have access to the place of the case, and there was no purpose of the crime even if there was any fact that the defendant used fire extinguishers, the defendant did not control H and the victim G at the time of entering the third floor, and the defendant did not intentionally assault the victim G. In light of the fact that there was no intention to commit a crime of intrusion and the defendant's access to the third floor is not contrary to the intention of the manager. 2) When the defendant entered the third floor as to the special violence, when G entered the third floor, he was placed with a fire extinguisher, and the body of the defendant sawd with him, and the body of the defendant was caused by the victim, and the defendant did not appear to have committed an intentional assault.

Even if it was assaulted, it is not a dangerous thing since it was after the fire extinguishing.

B. Even if the defendant is found guilty of the charge of interference with business and special assault, considering the following: (a) even if the defendant is found guilty of the charge of interference with business; (b) the defendant recognizes the crime of interference with business; (c) the defendant appears to have caused contingent crimes under the influence of alcohol; (d) the defendant’s act is a plan to agree with the victim D through his parents; (c) the defendant’s act does not incur monetary damage; and (d) the result of injury to the victim G does not occur; and (e) when the judgment of this case becomes final and conclusive, the defendant must additionally serve six-month imprisonment with prison labor due to the invalidation of the sentence of suspension of execution (ten months).

2. Determination

A. Judgment of the court below on the assertion of mistake of facts

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 성남지원 2015.12.11 2015고단2084

-부산지방법원 서부지원 2019.11.21 2019고단562

-대전지방법원 2020.03.18 2019노3428

-서울북부지방법원 2016.12.22 2016노948

-서울남부지방법원 2016.09.02 2016고단2020