logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 춘천지방법원 2014.12.11 2014고정414
재물손괴
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 300,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On April 2014, at around 15:00, the Defendant damaged the unclaimed property of the city by spreading the examination color press frame on the front side of Chapter 2 of the Electric Team owned by the victim D(66 years of age, South) (180cm, 90cm, 180cm of age, 90cm).

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of witness D;

1. Statement made to D by the police;

1. A criminal investigation report (related to attachment ofCCTV images, etc.);

1. Application of the written complaint of DNA and the Acts and subordinate statutes governing the case;

1. Relevant Article 366 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense and Article 366 of the Selection of Punishment;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. Judgment on the assertion of the Defendant and the defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The defendant asserts that the electricity panel of this case is not used as the electricity panel, and the victim uses it for the purpose of the bulletin board. Thus, since the waste board is not the object of the crime of causing property damage, and the defendant's root frame was naturally erased, the electricity panel of this case did not damage the defendant's act.

Even if the electricity panel of this case cannot be used for the use of the electricity panel, since the defendant is used for the purpose of the bulletin board, it cannot be viewed as a thing with no utility or utility or utility as property (see Supreme Court Decision 2007Do5207, Sept. 20, 2007). The defendant's above assertion is not accepted since it was restored ex post facto after the damage, even if the defendant's root frame was crossed out in natural state as the defendant's assertion of domestic affairs.

2. The Defendant alleged a justifiable act, i.e., the victim posted a notice that defames his reputation on the bulletin board, thereby breaking the presses above constitutes a justifiable act that does not violate social rules.

arrow