(영문) 수원지방법원 2014.12.11 2014노2651 | 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) 수원지방법원 2014.12.11 2014노2651

업무방해

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by a fine of 500,000 won.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant issued a witness to make an agreement using a member's seal cans, etc. with the computer of the association's office and posted a letter "to make it public by using a cans of a member's seal imprint agreement. The five members of the association will be informed." The Defendant cannot be deemed to have interfered with the redevelopment business of the president D and the directors of the association by fraudulent means.

Nevertheless, the lower court convicted the Defendant of charges by misunderstanding the facts charged.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances, which can be acknowledged by the court below's decision on the assertion of mistake of facts and evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below and the trial court, that is, there was no objective evidence to acknowledge the existence of the agreement alleged by the defendant that it was actually prepared, E claiming that the defendant had doping the above agreement, and F, claiming that the defendant was present in the court below as a witness and testified to the purport that he was not aware of such agreement, the defendant prepared an agreement with the contractor or the subcontractor by stealing the seal impression of the union members, and the defendant stated the agreement in the bulletin board as if the defendant was in possession, but the agreement did not exist even if the defendant's assertion itself was based on the defendant's own opinion, and the defendant voluntarily stated that the defendant deleted the above contents as the same (Evidence No. 629 of the evidence record), and there was a fact that the witness M of the party's trial witness had a adviser at the promotion committee office around 208 at around 208, and five members had affixed seals.

“,” made a statement to the effect, but M is together with Defendant and D.

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 2014.05.08 2013고정2158

-서울북부지방법원 2013.07.05 2013고정750

-대구고등법원 2019.11.27 2018나26032

-서울동부지방법원 2021.02.05 2019가합1419

-대구지방법원 포항지원 2016.01.28 2015고단912