beta
Text
Defendant
A shall be punished by a fine for negligence of KRW 2,000,000, and by a fine of KRW 1,000,000.
The Defendants respectively.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
Defendant
A is the president of D Co., Ltd., and Defendant B is the employees of D Co., Ltd.
On June 16, 2017, at around 11:30 on June 16, 2017, Defendants: (a) reported the network, and Defendant B opened a lock door to enter the building through the toilet window located behind the building, and Defendant A intruded into the building through the open entrance.
As a result, the Defendants conspired into a structure managed by the injured person.
Summary of Evidence
1. The Defendants’ respective legal statements
1. Statement of the police statement related to G;
1. A report on internal investigation (on-site conditions, etc.);
1. Each site photograph, written decision, written agreement, endorsement receipt of electronic bills, and transfer confirmation certificate [a] acknowledged that the Defendants entered the building located on the land E (hereinafter “the building of this case”) in Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, as stated in the facts constituting the crime, the Defendants asserted to the effect that there was no intention of intrusion on the building of this case to the extent that they had exercised a lien on the instant building in order to secure the construction cost claim of D.
However, the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court, namely, ① the Defendants continued to possess the instant building since the time when the Defendants had claims for construction costs related to the instant building.
The Defendants were in possession of the instant building according to the photograph taken out around April 2017, when the Defendants appeared to have entered the instant building through the toilets of the instant building in order to be granted a lien in the auction procedure of the instant building (i.e., the Daejeon District Court Decision Hasan Branch H), and (ii) according to the photograph taken out outside the instant building around April 2017, the Defendants occupied the instant building.
It is difficult to see the motive and background of the crime, the contents and method of the act, etc.