logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2019.08.14 2018고단8143
업무방해
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

[Criminal Justice] On July 26, 2018, the Defendant is a person who has eight times of the same kind of violent crime in addition to having received a summary order of a fine of two million won by the Seoul Central District Court for the crime of interference with business at the Seoul Central District Court.

[2018 Highest 8143] From October 12, 2018 to 08:00, the Defendant entered the “D” convenience store operated by the victim C in Gwanak-gu in Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Seoul Special Metropolitan City, and caused the victim to take a disturbance, such as spiting down the drinking, spiting the drinking on the floor, sprinking the drinking, sprinking the drinking, sprinking the sprinking, sprinking the sprink on the floor, thereby making the other customers of the convenience store.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the victim's convenience store operation by force.

[2019 Man-Ma3126] On March 2, 2019, the Defendant requested the “F” restaurant located in Gwanak-gu in Seoul Special Metropolitan City to drink, and demanded the victim G, a management employee of the relevant place, to resume the drinking, even though he refused to do so. G, a management employee of the relevant place, was released out of the Defendant on the condition that G, on the condition that he/she was suffering from the 1st of liquor, she was going to open a door to close the entrance, and she was unable to avoid a disturbance of approximately 1 hour and 30 minutes per hour and her time and her time to stop his/her employee H’s front of the h where he/she disposed of garbage, and as he/she would cause a threat to re-enter into the restaurant following H.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the restaurant business of victims by force.

Summary of Evidence

[2018 Highest8143]

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Police suspect interrogation protocol of the accused;

1. A written statement of victim C;

1. Investigation report (to hear victim C Telephone Statements) (to hear victim C Telephone Statements)

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A written G and I written statement;

1. An investigation report (on-site CCTV image verification), an investigation report (F’F’s H currency), an investigation report (on-site CCTV image suspension screen), a CCTV screen-shielding, an investigation report (G, H statement hearing), an investigation report (to hear the statements of a witness), an investigation report (to hear the statements of a witness), and CCTV images.

arrow