logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 제주지방법원 2013.10.31 2013노279
업무방해
Text

All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant’s act of entering the facts charged in the instant case constitutes a legitimate act, and thus, constitutes a legitimate act, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal principles or misapprehending the legal principles on the facts charged in the instant case.

(2) On August 30, 2013, an attorney-at-law submitted after the deadline for submitting a written reason for appeal and the statement of reasons for appeal filed on August 30, 2013 are considered only to the extent it supplements the reasons for appeal).

The sentencing of the prosecutor's court (one year of suspended execution in six months of imprisonment) is too unhued and unfair.

2. Determination

A. As to the Defendant’s assertion of a justifiable act, “an act that does not contravene the social norms” under Article 20 of the Criminal Act refers to an act that is permissible in light of the overall spirit of legal order, or the social ethics or social norms surrounding it, and whether a certain act is justified as an act that does not violate the social norms, and thus, the illegality should be excluded, based on specific circumstances, and should be determined on an individual basis, based on a reasonable and reasonable basis. Thus, for such a justifiable act to be recognized, the requirements such as the motive or justification of the act, the reasonableness of the means or method of the act, the balance of the legal interests of the protected interests and infringed interests, urgency, and any other means or method other than the act

(2) In light of the following circumstances established by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, namely, the Defendant’s opposition to the instant construction work, as well as the Defendant’s access to the entrance of the instant construction site during a period of more than two hours, and the construction is delayed due to the Defendant’s aforementioned act, the Defendant’s act was carried out as an indication opposing the instant construction work for public interest.

arrow