(영문) 울산지방법원 2020.05.15 2019고정170

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) 울산지방법원 2020.05.15 2019고정170

재물손괴등

Text

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

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

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. From around 13:00 on August 22, 2018 to around 14:00 on the same day, the Defendant destroyed the key repair hole to the above heading room B (hereinafter “instant building”) where the victim D exercises the right of retention in Ulsan-gu, Jung-gu, Seoul (hereinafter “instant building”) so as to have the repair cost’s utility equivalent to approximately KRW 200,000,000, market price.

2. The Defendant, at the same time and at the same place as paragraph 1, dismantled the entrance and correction devices and opened an entrance and intrudes into the residence managed by the victim D.

3. The Defendant interfered with business by destroying the entrance gate repair and correction device at a time and place like Paragraph 1, and thereby obstructing the victim E, a security guard, “the victim E, the security guard of which interfered with the work of managing the security in the exercise of the right of retention by force for one hour, including the victim’s attitude, i.e., why the security guard does not interfere with the work of South and North in the face of guard, why is, why is, why is, why is, what is, what is, what is, what is what is the bit of a bitch, what is the bit of a bitch, what is, what is, what is the bit of a bitch, what is the bit of a bitch.”

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of witness E and D;

1. Decision of Busan High Court;

1. Contracts for transfer and takeover of bonds;

1. Determination as to the defendant and his/her defense counsel's assertion

1. Criminal facts1 of the judgment;

A. Since the alleged defendant is the actual owner of the building C of this case, the entrance and correction device of the facts constituting the crime in the judgment is owned by the defendant.

Even if it is the victim D's owned property, since the victim D was installed voluntarily, it is reasonable that the defendant, who is the owner of the building C of this case, dismantles it as an act that is reasonable by social norms and thus, illegal.

B. According to each evidence of the judgment, F is the instant case.

유사 판례

-전주지방법원 정읍지원 2017.07.20 2017고단113

-인천지방법원 2013.01.31 2012고정4679

-대구지방법원 안동지원 2014.09.19 2014고단178

-광주지방법원 2019.10.01 2019노465

-춘천지방법원강릉지원 2020.08.28 2020고단405