(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2019.09.11 2018고정288

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) 서울서부지방법원 2019.09.11 2018고정288

업무방해

Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

Around 06:00 on October 1, 2017, the Defendant attached a warning board to the “D Parking Lot” operated by the victim C in Seodaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “instant parking lot”) to the effect that there was a complaint in the process of negotiations with the victim in the lease agreement with the victim, thereby bringing a container to the entrance of the instant parking lot, obstructing the passage of the vehicle, and temporarily opening the said container free of charge.

Accordingly, the Defendant interfered with the victim's parking lot operation by force.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. C’s legal statement;

1. Statement to C by the police;

1. Each investigation report (related to on-site confirmation, lease contract, etc. submitted by a suspect);

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to photographs;

1. Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act and the choice of fines concerning the crime;

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

1. Determination as to the assertion by the defendant and his/her defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The assertion;

A. As to the constituent elements of the instant parking lot, the victim was the representative of F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “F”) who leased and operated the instant parking lot from the E Urban Environment Improvement Promotion Committee (hereinafter “Promotion Committee”), and was actually operating the instant parking lot. The victim lost its operating authority by transferring F to another person around May 2017, which was before the crime was committed.

In addition, since a promotion committee had terminated the lease contract on the instant parking lot by lawfully cancelling the lease contract on the instant parking lot around October 2017, the victim was disqualified from the authority to operate the instant parking lot at the time of the crime.

Therefore, at the time of committing the crime, the victim cannot be deemed to be the operator of the instant parking lot.

The victim's parking lot management business of this case is subject to protection of the crime of interference with business.

참조조문

유사 판례

-의정부지방법원 2016.08.16 2015구합9013

-수원지방법원성남지원 2015.01.08 2014가합2132

-수원지방법원 2017.09.05 2016구합68824

-대구지방법원 2017.04.12 2017나1255

-부산지방법원 2019.04.26 2018나5369