beta
Text
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.
Provided, That the above punishment shall be imposed for two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles as to each business obstruction 1) since the Defendant’s farm was expropriated or removed without proper compensation, and the Defendant committed an act identical to the facts charged in this part of the facts charged to prevent the Defendant from losing the base of his/her occupation, it constitutes an act of self-help or exercising the right of resistance. 2) In regard to the damage of property, the Defendant did not know that the Defendant did not know that he/she was provokingd, and thus, did not have any intention to damage the F’s interest.
B. The sentence imposed by the lower court (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. 1) Determination of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles as to each business obstruction claim refers to a reasonable act to avoid the impossibility or significant difficulty of execution of the claim in a case where it is impossible to preserve the claim in accordance with the legal procedure (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Do717, Dec. 28, 2007). According to the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below and the trial court, it does not seem that the construction of this case is illegal. Even if the above illegal ground exists in the construction, it cannot be deemed that the defendant was unable or considerably difficult to preserve his claim through the legal procedure, such as the provisional injunction disposition, and it cannot be deemed that the defendant's act is a substantial act to avoid the impossibility of preservation of the claim, and there is no justifiable reason to block the defendant's exercise of the right of resistance as alleged by the defendant. Thus, this part of the defendant's assertion is without merit in the judgment of the court below as to property damage.