logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2020.04.16 2019노360
퇴거불응등
Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

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

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In relation to the offense of insult and misunderstanding of legal principles, the Defendant had stayed in the hospital receipt room in order to find H while she was an employer of Hah who was employed by Hah and entered the hospital, and thus, there was no intention to refuse to comply with C’s request for eviction, and even if C’s refusal to comply with C’s request for eviction, this does not violate social rules. 2) In relation to the offense of insult, the victim merely expressed an indecent and indecent expression as to his or her h’s h’s h’s h’s h’s h’s h’s h’s h’s h’s h’s h’s h’s h’s h’s h’s h’s h’s h’s h’s h’

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on misconception of facts and misapprehension of legal principles

A. The following circumstances acknowledged by the lower court based on the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court, namely, (i) F and G, when the Defendant entered a hospital, did not answer the visit of the Defendant, but did not reveal that he was the husband of H; and (ii) according to the CCTV images of the hospital, C was out of the hospital clinic and the Defendant.

In full view of all the circumstances, including the fact that the defendant was refused to leave the hospital, and the fact that the police officer who was dispatched to the hospital was moving the defendant out of the hospital and the defendant's refusal to leave the hospital was terminated, the defendant at the time shall leave the hospital C.

It clearly expresses his intention not to respond to the request, and such a defendant's act does not constitute a justifiable act as provided in Article 20 of the Criminal Act.

Therefore, we cannot accept this part of the defendant's assertion.

B. The court below duly adopted and examined the evidence of the offense of insult.

arrow