logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2014.11.27 2014노3563
공갈등
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Error of facts and misapprehension of legal principles: It is true that it has been beyond the front of the G Research Institute.

There is no fact that there is no threat to the victim in order to receive the agreed amount.

Each defamation point: There is no fact that there was no statement as described in each of the facts charged.

Even if such facts are recognized, the illegality is excluded because it was for the public interest of the union members.

Injury: There shall be no fact of causing injury.

Even if the fact of exercising tangible power is recognized, there is no causal relationship between this fact and the injury of the victim.

B. The lower court’s sentencing (fine 2.5 million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination on the grounds for appeal

A. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below claiming mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, the fact that the defendant committed all the acts as stated in each of the facts charged in the instant case

In addition, according to the investigation report and diagnosis report of 17 pages of evidence records, the causal relationship between the defendant's act and the victim's injury is recognized.

On the other hand, there is no room for applying Article 310 of the Criminal Act to the act falling under Article 307 (2) of the Criminal Act with regard to the dismissal of illegality. Thus, in this case where the defendant defames the victim by pointing out false facts, Article 310 of the Criminal Act with regard to public interest does not apply.

Therefore, the defendant's argument in this part is rejected.

B. Although there are favorable circumstances for the Defendant, such as the primary charge of unfair sentencing and the fact that each damage is not significant, considering the following circumstances, the Defendant’s assertion is not acceptable on the grounds that the sentence imposed by the lower court is unlimited and unreasonable.

It was not recovered from damage and not agreed. The victims want to be punished. The punishment determined by the court below.

arrow