logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 고양지원 2017.03.10 2016고정1016
폭력행위등처벌에관한법률위반(공동재물손괴등)
Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

The summary of the facts charged is that the defendant, in collaboration with the defendant's wife C on May 9, 2015, removed 100,000 won of a tree suspender, which is equivalent to 200,000 won of the market value of the members of the above church owned by the members of the above church, which was attached to the outer wall of the field container office in Gyeyang-gu, Seoyang-gu, Seoyang-gu at the time of height around 09:15, 201 and concealed

Judgment

The defendant and defense counsel asserts that the fact-finding of this case is removed from the outer wall by the defendant and that it constitutes a justifiable act to protect the ownership of the defendant in containers.

Comprehensively taking account of the data submitted by the defendant and his defense counsel and the following circumstances acknowledged by the records, the defendant still owns the defendant since there is no evidence that he transferred the ownership of the container of this case to the victim, and the defendant's act of discovering and removing the signboard arbitrarily attached to another person's own building constitutes a justifiable act under Article 20 of the Criminal Act, as it satisfies the reasonable level to be permitted in light of social norms.

① On May 2014, the Defendant purchased the instant container at his/her own expense and installed it at the same place. As such, the Defendant has ownership of the container.

The victims have donated the container to the E church by the defendant.

One of the arguments, there is no evidence to acknowledge it.

② The Defendant permitted the instant container to be used as a wedding place of the E church, and it is recognized that the said container was used as a wedding place of the said church for one period, and that the E church signboard and on-site office display signboards were attached to the outer wall of the instant container during that period.

However, this fact alone shows that the defendant added the container of this case to the above church.

It is difficult to see thereafter, since it is not used as a place of worship, there is only a lot of church gatherings around the time of the occurrence of this case.

arrow