2011. Violation of the Act on the Punishment of Violences, etc. (Joint Collaboration)

b) Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint assault);

Intimidation, Violence, Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (Influence)

I)

이○○ ( xxxxxx - XXXXXXx ), 운전사

주거 서울 영등포구 00동 ㅡ 0000아파트 동 호

Seo-gu, Incheon Metropolitan City 00 Do- Do-

Number of capacity:

Attorney Park Jong-soo

April 27, 2011

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

Of the facts charged in the instant case, the charge that interferes with the business of the date and the light of the order of October 2008 and that of violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (person who committed a crime) shall be acquitted, respectively.

Of the facts charged in the instant case, the prosecution against each of the assault and intimidation is dismissed.

Criminal facts

As a private taxi driver who was engaged in business activities around the Kimpo Airport and caused frequent disputes among taxi drivers in order to attract passengers, the Defendant organized meetings of Incheon taxi drivers (hereinafter referred to as "the above meetings") and took charge of the operation of meetings and the management of members in order to attract passengers by holding other taxi drivers while waiting together around December 2001. The Defendant committed violence such as assaulting other taxi drivers or sprinking flishing with flick drivers in the course of attracting passengers.

1. Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint assault);

A. On October 2008, the Defendant, around 13:00, at the Kimpo Airport's domestic taxi platform (hereinafter referred to as "the above taxi platform") located in Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government 00 dong-gu, the Defendant: (56 years old); (a) the Defendant, an exemplary taxi driver, prevented the Defendant from committing a passenger act; (b) the Defendant, who was a taxi driver belonging to the above gathering, took a bucking view, bucking the victim's buck, and walking the victim's buck, with the Defendant and the above gathering, she took the view that the Defendant and the above taxi driver, who were the taxi driver belonging to the above gathering, walked the victim's buck beyond the runway floor while taking a bath.

Accordingly, the Defendant assaulted the victim jointly with the above subordinate & subordinate departments (each investigation).

나. 피고인은 2010. 8. 중순 일자불상 19 : 00경 위 택시 승강장에서 택시운전기사인 피해자 백○ ( 47세 ) 과 위 모임 소속 택시운전기사인 홍♤☆이 피해자의 택시 정차지 점과 관련하여 말다툼을 하자 피고인과 위 모임 소속 택시운전기사인 부 등 약 6 명이 피해자 앞으로 다가가 욕설을 하면서, 피고인은 손으로 피해자를 때릴 듯한 태도를 보이고, 위 부 등은 머리 부분이나 어깨 부분 등으로 피해자를 밀쳤다 .

Accordingly, the defendant assaulted the victim jointly with the above division, etc. (each investigation during each investigation).

2. Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint intimidation);

피고인은 2010. 9. 17. 14 : 00경 위 택시 승강장에서 모범택시 운전기사인 피해자 임▷ ( 79세 ) 이 위 모임 소속 택시운전기사들에 대한 진정서를 냈다는 이유로 위 모임 소속 택시운전기사인 차 & ■은 피해자에게 욕설을 하면서 주먹을 피해자의 얼굴 주변에서 휘두르고, 피고인은 욕설을 하면서 " 진정서 계속 넣고 다니는 놈들 가만히 안 둔다, 어떤 더러운 새끼들이 신고를 하냐, 가만두나 봐라 " 라고 말하였다 .

Accordingly, the defendant threatened the victim jointly with the above (in the process of investigation).

3. Interference with business;

피고인은 2006. 11. 하순 일자불상 15 : 00경 위 택시 승강장에서, ▶▲▲▲▲▲조합 지도과 소속 교통지도원 피해자 장♤☆ ( 27세 ) 이 위 모임 소속 택시운전기사들의 호객 행위를 제지하자 피고인은 욕설을 하면서 피해자가 쓰고 있던 모자를 벗긴 다음 바닥에 던지고, 손으로 윗옷 뒷부분을 잡아 밀고, 위 모임 소속 택시운전기사인 부 은 주먹으로 피해자의 머리 뒷부분과 얼굴 부위를 수회 때리고, 위 모임 소속 택시운전기사인 ♠♠은 발로 피해자의 온몸을 수회 걷어찼다 .

이로써 피고인은 위 부 및 ♣♠♠ ( 각 수사중 ) 과 공동하여, 위력으로 피해자 장♤ ☆의 택시 승강장 질서유지에 관한 업무를 방해하였다 .

Summary of Evidence

1. 증인 김▲, 임의 각 법정진술과 증인 김□■, 백○의 각 일부 법정진술

1. 김□■, 백, 임쇼, 장♤☆에 대한 각 경찰 진술조서

Application of Statutes

1. Article applicable to criminal facts;

Article 2(2) and (1)1 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of joint assault), Article 2(2) and (1)1 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, Article 2(2) and (1)1 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, Article 283(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of joint intimidation), Articles 314(1) and 30 of the Criminal Act (the point of interference with business), the choice of each imprisonment

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

Articles 37 (former part), 38 (1) 2, and 50 of the Criminal Act

The acquittal portion

1. 2008. 10. 중순 일자불상경 업무방해의 점이 부분 공소사실의 요지는, 피고인이 2008. 10. 중순 일자불상 16 : 00경 위 택시 승강장에서 택시운전기사인 피해자 김□△ ( 53세 ) 이 손님을 태우고 자신의 택시를 출발시 키려 하자 피고인과 위 모임 소속 택시운전기사인 & ♠♠은 욕설을 하면서 성명불상자 5명과 함께 피해자의 택시 앞을 가로막음으로써 위 ♣♠♠ 등과 공동하여 위력으로 피해자 김□△의 택시 운행 업무를 방해하였다는 것이다 .

In light of the above, although the defendant was present at the time, he made a statement at the prosecutor's office of Kim Jong-sung and the third trial of △△△, it is difficult to view that the above evidence alone exercised the power, which is an act of interference with business, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this otherwise.

Therefore, this part of the facts charged constitutes a case where there is no proof of crime, and thus, is acquitted under the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

2. The summary of the facts charged on the violation of the Punishment of Violence, etc. Act is as follows: ① on March 18, 2008, the Defendant loaded one finger (37cm in length x 15cm in the cargo partitions (37cm in length x 15cm) of the Defendant on March 18, 2008, and carried one finger, a dangerous object, such as assault or intimidation, by driving the above taxi in Seoul, Gyeonggi, Incheon, etc. including the Kimpo Airport, without justifiable reasons, at a time from October 18, 2010 to December 18, 2010, the Defendant carried one finger, which is a dangerous object, such as assault or intimidation, and carried one hand for the purpose of using the cargo loaded (37cm in length x 15cm in length x 15cm in length and 27cm in Incheon, without justifiable reason, and the Defendant carried one hand in the cargo partitions of the Defendant from around early 2010 to December 18, 2010.

The "Carrying of dangerous objects" in Article 7 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act refers to the possession of dangerous objects below the body or body near the body and, in the absence of any other specific criminal act, even though there is no other criminal act, if there is a deadly weapon that is likely to be used for violent crimes without any justifiable reason, the act of carrying in itself meets the elements of the crime as provided in Article 7 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act. However, it is not presumed that the possession of a deadly weapon or other dangerous objects is not likely to be used for the crime as provided in the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (see Supreme Court Decision 2005Do3875, Aug. 25, 2005).

However, in light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the records of this case, i.e., the defendant made a statement that he had purchased nives to collect nives from an investigative agency to this court, and in fact, the defendant did not commit violent acts using deadly weapons, it is insufficient to recognize that the defendant carried dangerous objects that are likely to be used for violent crimes under the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act without justifiable grounds, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge otherwise.

Therefore, this part of the facts charged also constitutes a case where there is no proof of crime, and thus, is acquitted under the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act

Public Prosecution Rejection Parts

1. Summary of each charge of violence and intimidation;

A. On December 1, 2008, at around 17:00, the Defendant assaulted the victim, i.e., the victim china (56 years of age), a model taxi driver, who was aboard his taxi, with respect to the Defendant’s act of seating, on the first day of December 2008.

② 피고인은 2010. 5. 일자불상 15 : 00경 위 택시 승강장에서, 피고인이 태우려던 외국인 손님을 모범택시 운전기사인 피해자 김♥ ( 60세 ) 이 태웠다는 이유로 욕설을 하면서 손으로 피해자의 멱살을 잡고 흔드는 등 피해자를 폭행하였다 .

나. 협박①피고인은 2008. 7. 중순 일자불상 15 : 00경 위 택시 승강장에서, 모범택시 운전기사 피해자 한♥ ( 59세 ) 이 위 모임 소속 택시운전기사들과 다른 택시운전기사들의 싸움을 말렸다는 이유로 피해자에게 욕설을 하면서 " 늙은 새끼들이 죽을려고 환장했나 .

The tin-open-open-open-open-open-open-open-open-open-open-open-open-open-open-open-open-open-open-open-open-open-up (hereinafter referred to as “victim”).

②피고인은 2008. 10. 초순 일자불상 14 : 00경위 택시 승강장에서, 대기하고 있던 모범택시 운전기사인 피해자 김♠○ ( 68세 ) 에게 다가가 아무런 이유도 없이 주먹을 보인 상태로 욕설을 하면서 " 죽을라고 환장했나 " 라고 말하는 등 피해자를 협박하였다 .

③ On October 1, 2008, at around 17:30 on the first day of the taxi platform, the Defendant: (a) at around 30, the 17th century, the Do governor (the 56-year old) prior to the victim’s Do (the 56-year old) against the Defendant’s Doctrine dispute with another model driver; (b) Doctrine Doctrine Doctrine Doctrine Doctrine. “When Doctrine, Doctrine would be said to be the victim; and (c) Doctrine Doctrine, Doctrine, and Doctrineed the victim.

④피고인은 2010. 5. 7. 13 : 30경 위 택시 승강장에서, 택시운전기사인 피해자 김▲ ( 64세 ) 에게 다가가 " 인천택시 건드리지 마라, 건드리면 줘 패 버릴 테니까 " 라고 말하는 등 피해자를 협박하였다 .

⑤피고인은 2010. 5. 10. 14 : 30경 위 택시 승강장에서, 택시운전기사인 피해자 김▲이 호객행위를 한다는 이유로 욕설을 하면서, " 그렇게 하지 마라, 죽여 버릴 테니까 " 라고 말하는 등 피해자를 협박하였다 .

2. Determination

This part of the facts charged cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s express intent under Articles 260(3) and 283(3) of the Criminal Act. According to the records, it can be acknowledged that the victims expressed their intent not to punish the defendant on March 17, 201, which was after the institution of the instant indictment. Thus, each of the charges against this part is dismissed in accordance with Article 327(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act.

The reason for sentencing is against the defendant's wrong agreement with most victims, but it is judged that it is necessary to strictly punish the defendant, considering the fact that other taxi drivers or controllers indirectly damaged the airport users, the nature of the crime is very poor, and the status and role of the defendant, and it is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Kim Jong-hee