logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2016.02.05 2015노3460
재물손괴
Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds of appeal: ① the chairperson of the council of occupants' representatives of the Busan Seo-gu, Busan Seo-gu, C2 and 3 apartment complexes (hereinafter "the apartment of this case") stated in the police investigation of the property damage case against himself that "K ordered the management office of the apartment of this case to remove the banner by ordering him/herself and the employee of the management office of the apartment of this case"; ② the chairperson D and the director general of the organization bureau of the apartment of this case made a telephone call with the police officer at the time of the police investigation of the defendant, K and four persons, and Eul called with E at the time of the police investigation of this case; ③ the legal statement of the court of the court below to the contrary purport is difficult to believe; ③ the employees of the management office of this case was removed by the order of the management office G at the court of the court of the original instance, and there was no fact that he/she was ordered to remove the banner, i.e., the statement of the management office G of this case, that he/she could not remove the banner."

In light of the fact that it is difficult to see that the credibility of each statement made by D and I is high, and thus, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts affecting the judgment.

2. Determination

A. The judgment of the court below revealed that ① as an employee of the management office of the apartment of this case, the head of the management division, E, and the head of the management guidance division, all of which stated that the defendant did not receive an order to remove banner from the defendant in the court of the court below; ② the part of the statement in E in the police interrogation protocol against the defendant is inadmissible; ③ D appears in the court of the court below that the defendant ordered the head of the management office G to remove the banner; and ③ from H of the head of the guard team, the defendant brought the banner and concealed it in the warehouse.

arrow