(영문) 광주지방법원 2020.09.09 2019노2177 | 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 2020.09.09 2019노2177

재물손괴

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant of mistake of facts only discharged living wastewater through a drainage pipe that is located next to the victim’s argument that he owned, but did not discharge living wastewater in the victim’s argument.

In addition, since the father of the defendant, not the defendant, establishes a drainage pipe, the defendant cannot be deemed to have discharged the living wastewater in the discussion of the victim.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (fine 5 million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court and the first instance court on the assertion of mistake of facts, the following facts can be acknowledged.

1) At the investigation stage, the Defendant stated that the Defendant established a drainage pipe to discharge the living wastewater generated from the house around November 30, 2015, and that the Defendant set up a drainage pipe by leasing the arguments of the victim and the victim, and that E also set up a drainage pipe. 2) The drainage pipe installed by the Defendant is connected with the collection and alteration installed in the Defendant’s house, and is installed to discharge the water on the drainage channel located adjacent to the victim’s arguments.

3) In 2017, E cultivated rice in the victim’s rice field, while growing rice in 2017, due to the living wastewater discharged from the drainage pipe installed by the Defendant, experienced difficulties in rice farming, such as with death of rice plants, and making a temporary drainage channel using the fluor. 4) The victim filed a civil petition with the Mine Office on February 14, 2017, when the living wastewater continues to be discharged from the drainage pipe installed by the Defendant as a result of the victim’s debate. Accordingly, the Mining Office requested the Defendant to restore to its original state on March 3, 2017.

5. On the other hand, on the other hand, around May 23, 2018, the drainage way that is adjacent to the victim's arguments, the living wastewater discharged from the drainage pipe was improved, or the living wastewater was exceeded so that it was flowing into the victim's rice.

On November 30, 2015, the following circumstances, which can be seen by the above facts of recognition, are the Defendant’s living wastewater.

유사 판례

-대구지방법원 2016.10.27 2016나7331

-대구지방법원 경주지원 2017.11.29 2017고단672

-창원지방법원 통영지원 2014.04.25 2014고단158

-대전지방법원 서산지원 2014.10.10 2014고정163

-광주지방법원 장흥지원 2014.01.09 2013고정28