(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.03.24 2016노4573

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) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.03.24 2016노4573

공갈미수등

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant did not intimidation the victim to waive KRW 1.2 billion.

The Defendant stated to the effect that the Defendant would have paid off to the victim, “bed,” and “bed,” and there is no intention to obtain unlawful profits that would have the victim give up KRW 1.2 billion and gain profits equivalent to the same amount.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable and unfair.

2. Determination

A. In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court below, the defendant can be recognized as having threatened the victim as stated in the judgment below, and the defendant's intent to illegally obtain the victim is also sufficiently recognized.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of factual mistake is rejected.

① The fact that the defendant made the victim two times on April 14, 2016 that the defendant made the statement to the effect as stated in the original judgment is obviously based on the recording in the recording book.

② In the Defendant’s statement, it is clear that the National Tax Service’s report on tax evasion by the National Tax Service may receive a reward of up to 2 billion won, information to the Prosecutor’s Office, and the fact that the victim reported the victim’s failure to comply with the Defendant’s request, which would put the victim at a disadvantage, such as punishment, by reporting it to the National Tax Service or an investigative agency on the victim’s tax evasion, reporting on Bosing false reporting, etc.

(3) The defendant shall pay the victim money one year in return for the victim.

Since the statement of the court below is discussed, it is argued that there is no intention of unlawful acquisition by the defendant as stated in the judgment below.

However, in light of the following circumstances, the defendant will pay the victim money after a year.

The phrase seems to be merely a vindication for the victim to avoid the demand of the victim for return.

The victims of the business shall be the victims of the business.

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 2018.04.13 2017노6244

-부산지방법원 2018.11.16 2018노2670

-광주지방법원 2017.10.18 2017노2434

-제주지방법원 2017.05.11 2016노395

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.08.18 2017노1982