(영문) 부산지방법원 2018.11.29 2018노3694 | 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) 부산지방법원 2018.11.29 2018노3694

재물손괴

Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Although the prosecutor's appellate brief fully recognizes the fact that the defendant removed facilities owned by the victim and damaged them, the court below acquitted the defendant, which is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts or in the misapprehension of legal principles.

2. Determination

A. The summary of the facts charged in this case is the chairman of the committee of occupants representatives (hereinafter referred to as the “council of occupants representatives”) of the Busan-gu apartment complex D (hereinafter referred to as the “instant apartment complex”).

The Defendant: (a) had the employees of the apartment management office, etc. of the instant apartment complex (hereinafter “the instant apartment complex”) remove the instant apartment complex (around 4.8 million won) in a way that the victims, etc. were to remove the instant facilities (hereinafter “the instant facilities”) by means of a string and winding, which were installed by the members of the F E (51 years old), including the Victim E, using the hack pole, etc. using the hackre column; and (b) had the competent administrative authority remove the instant facilities, on the ground that the victims were not removed the instant facilities, on January 18, 2018, on the ground that the occupant’s representative meeting passed a resolution to remove the instant facilities.

Accordingly, the defendant damaged the victims' property.

B. The lower court acquitted the Defendant of the instant facts charged on the following grounds.

1) The gist of the Defendant and the defense counsel’s assertion is that the instant apartment complex was attached to the owner of the instant apartment complex and owned by the victims.

subsection (b) of this section.

In addition, even if the victims submitted a letter to the representative meeting of occupants of the apartment complex of this case on or around 2014, the ownership was attributed to the representative meeting of occupants.

It is reasonable to see it.

2) This Court has established the facts of recognition.

유사 판례

-부산지방법원 2018.10.10 2018고정1145

-대전지방법원 2017.09.08 2017고정705

-부산지방법원 2018.06.15 2017고단6029

-서울남부지방법원 2016.06.16 2015고단4939

-서울북부지방법원 2021.01.28 2020나34293