logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2012.10.17 2012노1395
폭력행위등처벌에관한법률위반(공동퇴거불응)등
Text

All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles 1) Defendants A and B’s obstruction of business and violation of the Punishment of Violence, etc. Act (joint withdrawal) Defendants 1 and 2’s violation of the Act on the Punishment of Violences, etc. (joint withdrawal) shall be deemed to have been newly established in the H Stock Company by the Labor-Management Group

(C) the Seo-gu L Terminal in Gwangju (hereinafter referred to as “bus terminal”).

(2) The lower court found Defendant A guilty of this part of the charges on this part of the charges, although it did not err by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment, on the grounds that the lower court found Defendant A guilty of this part of the charges, although there was no fact that Defendant A’s injury inflicted assault or injury on the victim A, did not constitute an act of assault or injury on the part of the charges.

3) Although Defendant C did not see the Chapter at the time when he intrudes the plaza beyond the police line, and did not assault the Victim AC, the lower court recognized the facts charged that the Defendant inflicted an injury on AC, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment. The lower court erred by misapprehending the facts that the lower court sentenced the Defendants to unfair sentencing (one year of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, two years of suspended execution, two years of suspended execution, two years of suspended execution, Defendant C: imprisonment with prison labor, one year and six months of suspended execution, and two years of suspended execution.

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances, which are acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, as follows, based on the determination of erroneous facts regarding Defendant A and B’s obstruction of business and violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (the allegation of erroneous facts as to the non-compliance with joint withdrawal), i.e., the dry field in the bus terminal parking lot, which is the place of the crime of interference with the instant business and non-compliance with the eviction and the AA square, are newly established.

arrow