(영문) 광주지방법원 2017.11.22 2017노159 | 리걸엔진

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) 광주지방법원 2017.11.22 2017노159

직무유기등

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. On July 19, 201, the Defendant: (a) discovered that C did not install a boundary flag in violation of the terms and conditions of permission, and sent a letter to C on September 4, 2013, to the effect that (i) around July 19, 201, prior to the extraction of aggregate with the permission for extraction of aggregate from the head of E head of E/Gun, C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “C”); (ii) discovered that C did not install a boundary flag; and (iii) comply with the conditions of permission on September 4, 2013.

After that, from May 15, 2014 to May 15, 2014, the Defendant urged C to comply with the conditions of permission by conducting on-site inspections several times, and C to withdraw measures.

The defendant responded to this situation verbally to the superior officer.

Since May 15, 2014, it was impossible to visit the site properly due to the tasks of local election and the division of the defendant's duties on behalf of the director.

In the end, the Defendant thought that the Defendant would take a measure against the Cho Man-man on the part of C, and did not take a measure according to the regular procedure, and did not perform his duties faithfully or neglected to perform duties.

may be seen as giving rise to, or not giving rise to, the refusal of his duties;

shall not be deemed to exist.

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence of the lower court (six months of imprisonment, two years of suspended sentence) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. (1) The lower court rejected the defense counsel’s assertion on the same purport as the grounds for appeal, and found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged, based on its stated reasoning.

(2) The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, i.e., the Defendant, on September 4, 2013.

유사 판례

-광주지방법원 순천지원 2016.03.31 2015고단797

-청주지방법원 영동지원 2017.08.10 2016고정39

-청주지방법원 2018.02.08 2017노1108

-부산지방법원 2018.03.14 2017고단6361

-부산지방법원 2018.08.16 2018고단1967