(영문) 광주지방법원 2014.04.17 2013노2821 | 리걸엔진

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) 광주지방법원 2014.04.17 2013노2821

공갈미수

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the victim suggested the agreed amount in return for the withdrawal of the civil petition several times, and there is no fact that he/she only complies with it, and he/she does not intend to receive the property by

2. Determination

A. As a means of conflict with the applicable legal doctrine, intimidation refers to notifying a threat of harm likely to be frighten to restrict the freedom of decision-making or interfere with the freedom of decision-making. A threat of harm is sufficient if it does not necessarily require the method of specification, and has the perception that it would cause harm to the other party by language or scambling. Although the method of realizing the right is used as a means of realizing the right, it shall be deemed that the implementation of a crime of threat is commenced as long as the method of realizing the right exceeds the permissible level or scope under the social norms. Whether a certain act exceeds the permissible level or scope specifically permitted under the social norms should be determined by comprehensively taking into account the subjective and objective aspects of the act, i.e., the purpose and method chosen as a whole.

(See Supreme Court Decision 94Do2422 delivered on March 10, 1995, etc.). B.

Judgment

However, according to the following facts acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the court below asserted that the defendant demanded 130 million won in the name of retirement allowance to the victim of the defect that the victim wants the amount as a consideration for the withdrawal of a civil petition, and the defendant respondeded to the demand that the victim make a statement of the amount desired by the victim, so the defendant did not want to receive property by harming the victim. However, according to the record of the recording, the defendant demanded that the victim pay money in the name of retirement allowance on the basis

If the victim does not accept it, the criminal complaint or lawsuit is in the future.

참조판례

-대법원 1995. 3. 10. 선고 94도2422 판결

유사 판례

-제주지방법원 2015.10.08 2015노155

-부산지방법원 2019.10.31 2019노2328

-수원지방법원 2015.09.11 2015노3124

-대법원 2013.09.13 2013도6809

-수원지방법원 2015.10.30 2015노3515