logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2013.11.21 2013고단371
업무방해등
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of two million won.

If the defendant fails to pay the above fine, 50,000 won shall be one day.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. On January 16, 2013, at least 18:10 on January 16, 2013, the Defendant interfered with the business of the victim’s restaurant business by: (a) by force, the Defendant interfered with the victim’s restaurant business by 40 minutes of his/her happiness, such as driving away away from the d restaurant operated by the victim B (at 56 years of age) located in Gangdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, taking a large amount of noise for the victim, without any reason, without any reason, while drinking; (b) sexual male and female customers who are scambling and resisting.

2. 모욕 피고인은 2013. 1. 16. 18:50경 신고 받고 위 D 식당에 출동한 강동 경찰서 E 지구대 소속 경찰관인 피해자 F(25세)로부터 반말과 욕을 하지 말라는 주의를 받자 위 B 등 주변 상인 7-8명이 있는 자리에서 “씹할, 내가 왜 너한테 반말하면 안 되는데, 나이도 나보다 한참 어린게, 씹할 놈아 잡아 가려면 잡아가봐, 내가 뭘 잘못했냐”라고 큰 소리로 욕을 하였다.

In this way, the defendant openly insultingd the victim F.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police statement made to F and B;

1. B written statements;

1. Application of each statute on filing of a complaint;

1. Relevant Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act; Article 314(1) of the Criminal Act; Article 311 of the Criminal Act; and selection of fines;

2. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act (within the scope of the aggregate of the maximum amounts of the crimes of the above two crimes, the aggravation of concurrent crimes with punishment determined by the crime of the obstruction of business with heavier punishment);

3. The part of dismissing the public prosecution under Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention in a workhouse; and

1. The summary of the facts charged, around January 16, 2013, the Defendant, at the D cafeteria operated by the victim B (Y, 56 years of age) located in Gangdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, expressed the victim B with a large voice, such as “I will drink customers, I will spath, I will spath, I will spath, I will spath, I will spath,” etc.

In this way, the defendant openly insultingd the victim B.

2. The above facts charged are subject to Article 311 of the Criminal Act.

arrow