logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2019.11.19 2018가단3523
위자료 등
Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 500,000 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual interest from October 23, 2019 to November 19, 2019.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On August 2016, the Defendant served as an employee in the E-gu area located in Dobong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, which is operated by the Plaintiff.

B. On November 18, 2016, the Plaintiff asserted that the Defendant stolen the above E-gu funeral revenue, and filed a charge of larceny with the Seoul Northern District Prosecutors' Office, but was indicted for non-guilty charges under Seoul Northern District Court Decision 2017No2686 on the ground that the above criminal complaint constitutes a false criminal complaint. However, on May 18, 2018, the Plaintiff received a judgment of innocence (Seoul Northern District Court Decision 2017No256) at the appellate court (Seoul Northern District Court Decision 2018Do8931) and the final judgment of innocence became final and conclusive by dismissing the final appeal against the above judgment.

In addition, on September 1, 2016, the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff’s ASEAN were sentenced to a fine of KRW 80,000,000, and KRW 1,000,00,000, as Seoul Northern District Court Decision 2017No2410, which was prosecuted by defamation, on the following grounds: “The Plaintiff and the Plaintiff’s ASEAN’s E-gu head of the above E-gu, stating that “the Plaintiff’s life is a Dok new, Nan’s life is a false horse, and a width is clear.”

On the other hand, at around 08:50 on September 21, 2016, the Defendant’s mother: (a) committed violence to the Plaintiff on the ground that the Defendant was unable to receive the payment from the Plaintiff; (b) sought to cut off the said mobile phone on the ground that the Plaintiff took it into his/her cell phone; and (c) thereby, was sentenced to a fine of KRW 1 million on July 6, 2017 by Seoul Northern District Court Decision 2017 High Court Decision 2017Da81.

C. The Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff forged the labor contract and filed a complaint with the following content by forging the private document:

(hereinafter “instant First Complaints”). 1. The Plaintiff and F, on October 14, 2016, drafted a document containing labor contract-related contents in the fifth E-Gu of the 5th floor of the Dobong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government G Building, and, on October 9, 2016, “The 22th day from August 9, 200 to 90,000 won per month from January 22: 6,500 x 52845,000,900 won.

arrow