(영문) 인천지방법원 2017.12.21 2017고정595

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) 인천지방법원 2017.12.21 2017고정595

재물손괴

Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. On July 2016, the Defendant destroyed the property of the victim by having a construction business operator who is not aware of the circumstances remove the existing building located on the said site from the Southern-gu Incheon Police Officer, Incheon, and then build a new building. In order to establish a new building, the Defendant damaged the property of the victim by letting the construction business operator, who is not aware of the circumstances, remove the part equivalent to 10 meters in width and 2 meters in height among the joint fences located on the boundary of the said site and the said site E, adjacent to the said site.

2. The joint wall recorded in the facts charged against the Defendant and his defense counsel’s assertion (hereinafter “joint wall of this case”) did not exist from the beginning. The Defendant removed the building owned by the Defendant (hereinafter “Defendant’s building”) that was constructed on the building site in Nam-gu, Incheon (hereinafter “Defendant’s site”) owned by the Defendant, and did not remove the joint wall of this case.

Even if the outer wall of the defendant's building was used as a joint fence to distinguish the boundary between the building site and the neighboring victim's ownership.

Even if the above outer wall falls under the sole ownership of the defendant, it cannot be the object of the crime of damage to property.

3. The main evidence as shown in the facts charged in the instant case lies in the victim E, the owner of the adjacent site and the ground building in the Defendant’s site, and there was a joint fence for about 20 years since it had already been installed between the principal’s building and the Defendant’s building at the time of acquiring the adjacent site and its ground building in the auction.

However, each statement is made in this court and investigative agency to the effect that the defendant's above joint wall and the above joint wall were used as the defendant's building outer wall by leaving the building in a way that the above joint wall and the building are attached to the above joint wall and then removed the above joint wall without the defendant's consent.

However, in full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by this Court, the victim asserts.

유사 판례

-광주지방법원 2016.01.27 2015고정1061

-서울중앙지방법원 2019.10.31 2019나22226 (1)

-서울중앙지방법원 2019.04.23 2018가단5206311

-서울서부지방법원 2014.02.21 2012가합6202

-서울동부지방법원 2014.08.14 2014고단88