logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2013.07.05 2013고정1391
정보통신망이용촉진및정보보호등에관한법률위반
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 700,000.

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

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. On October 19, 2012, the Defendant, at the Defendant’s house located in Gyeyang-gu Incheon Metropolitan City Gyeyang-gu, sent the Defendant’s mobile phone with the Defendant’s cell phone with the word “if there is no heated and heated so that it would result in a crime more than anything to be avoided,” and sent the Defendant’s cell phone with the victim’s cell phone with the word “if there is no heated and heated reason, it would have caused fear or apprehensions through an information and communications network over eight times in total, as shown in the list of crimes 1.

2. On October 21, 2012, at around 10:43, the Defendant sent the victim’s cell phone with the victim’s cell phone, “E, who, from a no scarcity to a different school, would leave the victim’s cell phone, have repeatedly sent the victim’s cell phone with the victim’s cell phone with the word “E, who, prior to being forced to leave the phone, would be fortunately cut off,” a total of seven times as indicated in the list of crimes in attached Table 2, which arouses fear or apprehension through an information and communications network.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each police statement made to D and E;

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

1. Article 74 (1) 3 and Article 44-7 (1) 3 of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, Etc., concerning facts constituting a crime;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

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

1. The defendant and his/her defense counsel's assertion on the assertion of the defendant and his/her defense counsel under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, despite the defendant's assertion that the act such as the defendant's criminal facts constitutes a legitimate act as an act constituting social norms, the method and degree of expression as stated in the crime

arrow