logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 제주지방법원 2015.08.13 2015고정431
업무방해
Text

Defendant

A and B shall be punished by fines of KRW 800,00, and by fines of KRW 1,500,000, respectively.

The Defendants respectively.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

D In Jeju, E is the Vice-Speaker of the Korean Association of Farmers and Fishermen, Defendant B is the chairman of the Jeju-do Council in Jeju-do, H is the employee in charge of the working-level of the Korean Association of Farmers and Fishermen, Defendant C is the Chairman of the Korean Association of Farmers and Fishermen, and Defendant A is the Chairman of the Korean Association of Farmers and Fishermen, and Defendant A is the Director of the Korean Association of Farmers and Fishermen.

Defendants, D, and H had contact with each other in advance for the purpose of interfering with the I’s exercise, and participated in the event site at around 13:55 on November 7, 2014 at J5-si, Jeju, with the aim of interfering with the I’s exercise.

After the beginning of the campaign speech at around 14:00 on the same day, the Defendants, D, and H cited diskettes against the Korea-China FTA, which were prepared in front of the opening of the event, and opened the event at the same time. At the same time, D, and H cut up 8 lines in front of the opening of the event, and spread off 5 minutes in the event site to the end by cutting off 8 lines in the day in which they were in possession of a bank, and spread off 3 tights inside the event site, and they interfere with the Defendants from continuing the event by exercising approximately 9 minutes of force, such as continuing the demonstration and the noise.

Summary of Evidence

1. Each legal statement of the defendant A and B;

1. Part of Defendant C’s legal statement

1. A protocol concerning the examination of each police suspect against D or H;

1. Statement of the police concerning L;

1. The Defendant C, after the closure of the situation, was at the venue of the event, at the determination of the Defendant C’s acquittal on the investigation report (in relation to interference with the business, CDs and caps) and the CCTV-faging-faging-faging-faging-faging-faging-faging-faging-faging-faging-faging-faging-faging-faging-fags

(Evidence 108 et al.) Application of the statute

1. Relevant Articles of the Criminal Act and the choice of punishment for the crime: Articles 314 (1) and 30 of the Criminal Act; Selection of a fine;

1. Detention at a workhouse: Articles 70(1) and 69(2)1 of the Criminal Act;

arrow