logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 홍성지원 2016.12.22 2016고정167
주거침입등
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,000,000.

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

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The defendant was suffering from the victim C (math, 58 years old) and the past internal relationship, and the victim did not talk with the defendant or receive the telephone of the defendant, which led to an respect for the victim.

1. On October 11, 2015, the Defendant violated the Act on Promotion, etc. of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, etc.: (a) made a phone call to the victim and made a telephone call with the victim; and (b) made it possible for the victim to repeatedly reach the victim with a sound that arouses fear or apprehension through an information and communications network, including, but not limited to, the victim’s mobile phone number, as indicated in the attached list of crimes, from the time when he/she made a speech, such as “I am fly fly fly fly fly fly fly fly fly fly fly fly fly fly fly fly fly fly fly fly fly fly fly fly fly fly fly fly fly fly fly,

2. On February 21, 2016, around 15:30 on 21, 2016, the Defendant entered into a house with the victim’s house opened to take into account that the victim’s house was not contacted by the victim.

Summary of Evidence

【Paragraph 1 of this Article】

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of the police in relation to C (Evidence Nos. 2) / [Article 2 at the time of sale]

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness C, E, and F;

1. Each police statement against C and E (Evidence Nos. 7, 8);

1. On-site photographs;

1. The Defendant reported internal death at around 15:30, the time when the facts constituting the crime were recorded, and the Defendant did not intrude into the victim’s house at around 17:45, and entered the victim’s house with the police officer after reporting to the police at around 17:45. However, according to each of the above evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court, the Defendant was 15:36, the victim reported to each police officer at around 15:36, and dispatched to the scene by the police officer at around 15:38, and the Defendant was able to gather through the front door.

arrow