logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2019.10.23 2019고단4072
업무방해등
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of five million won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Reasons

Criminal facts

On March 20, 2019, at around 23:58, the Defendant, at the main point of “D’s operation,” of the victim C in Yeonsu-gu Incheon Metropolitan City’s Yeonsu-gu, the Defendant, on the ground that the drinking value was fasted, she took a large voice for the victim, and tried to take the consignee as his/her hand, thereby obstructing the victim’s main store business by force.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Application of each police protocol of statement to C, E, and F

1. Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crime;

1. Determination of a fine by taking into account the following: (a) the degree of power of the instant case’s option is relatively not much severe; and (b) the Defendant, after committing the instant crime, agreed with the victim late later; and (c) his mistake is against the victim

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. The dismissal part of the prosecution under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The gist of this part of the facts charged is as follows: (a) on March 20, 2019, the Defendant used the Defendant’s mobile phone at the main point of “D’s operation” of the victim C in Yeonsu-gu Incheon, Yeonsu-gu, Incheon, for the reason that the drinking value has risen; and (b) the Defendant used the Defendant’s mobile phone toward the head of the victim’s head.

2. However, this is a crime falling under Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act and cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s express intent under Article 260(3) of the Criminal Act. According to the agreement and written application for non-prosecution of punishment submitted by the defendant’s defense counsel to this court, it can be recognized that the victim expressed his/her wish not to punish the defendant around October 16, 2019, after the public prosecution of this case was instituted. Thus, this part of the public prosecution is dismissed pursuant to Article 327(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act.

arrow