(영문) 대구지방법원 서부지원 2017.11.29 2017고정84

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) 대구지방법원 서부지원 2017.11.29 2017고정84

업무방해

Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 500,000.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, the amount of KRW 100,000 shall be paid.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant is the secretary of the “D Agricultural Partnership” in Daegu-gun District, and the victim E is the victim E from February 25, 2016, of the root field 12,00 square meters managed by the said Agricultural Partnership.

2. up to 25. It is a person who cultivates by entrustment from the above farming association corporation.

On May 27, 2016, the Defendant: (a) reported on May 27, 2016, around 09:00, that the Defendant: (b) required the victim to engage in the activity of cutting down the root year, and (c) required the victim to engage in the activity of cutting down one unit and five working persons, and (d) anticipated that the damaged person would not pay rent; (b) the Defendant is likely to cause the workers to be paid a large amount of rent, and (c) the Defendant called “a

“Acking the disturbance,” such as “Acking off work and leaving the workplace.”

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the root year cultivation of the victim by force.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness F and E;

1. Each police statement protocol against E and F (the defendant and his defense counsel claimed that the defendant's act was a manager of the land of G clan which is part of the root year of this case, and also for protecting property rights on behalf of the owners of the root field of this case, and constitutes a justifiable act. However, in light of the motive and background of the crime of this case and the process of the crime and the circumstances after the crime, etc. acknowledged by the evidence adopted earlier, the defendant should have exercised the defendant's right to claim for the dry field of the root year of this case through legitimate means, such as legal procedure, and it cannot be viewed that the act of obstructing the victim's cultivation by force without complying with this requirement constitutes a justifiable act that does not violate social rules because it does not constitute an act that does not violate social rules.

Application of Statutes

1. Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act and Article 314 of the same Act concerning the crime, the selection of fines;

1.Article 70(1) and (2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse.

참조조문

-형법 제70조 제1항

-형법 제314조 제1항

유사 판례

-대구지방법원 2018.05.10 2017노5722

-창원지방법원 거창지원 2018.05.02 2018고단60

-창원지방법원 통영지원 2014.02.06 2013고정699

-청주지방법원 2021.01.28 2020고정824

-의정부지방법원 2015.11.12 2015고정236