logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 경주지원 2017.06.22 2016고정278
업무방해등
Text

Defendant

A shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,00,00, KRW 3,000, KRW 1,000, KRW 3,000, KRW 1,000, respectively.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

【Defendant A is a director of the land division rearrangement association, Defendant B is an auditor of the above association, Defendant C is a managing director of H (State) who is the executor of the above association, and Defendant D is a member of the above company.

G The land rearrangement cooperative is a cooperative established for the purpose of the "JJ district facilities project for the racing urban planning" on the land of the I Special Self-Governing Province, and entered into the entrustment contract with H around August 2013, but the project was not normally carried out due to the problem of financing of the above company. On October 2015, it held a board of representatives to terminate the above and the entrustment contract with the above company and decided to select K as the executive company (State) and (State) K as the contractor.

However, on April 2016, the Daegu District Court rendered a decision to confirm the invalidity of the above resolution in the Daegu District Court racing support (Joint 2904). Since 2015, H (State) and K (State) after 2015, K had the right to implement the above project and conflict with each other.

[Criminal Facts]

1. Defendant A, Defendant B, the Land Partition Adjustment Association, H (ju), and K used three offices located in one Dong in the light-scale steel framed building with a total floor area of L 347.7 square meters at the time of racing. However, the above union and H (ju) office had a entrance leading to the outside, but the said office did not have a entrance leading to the outside, and the employees of the said company had access to the outside through the entrance at the above association office.

When there were no documents related to the business of the above association, the defendants thought that the employees of K-K lost the right to execute the business through the above association office and brought up the documents related to the business of the association. (The state) K-K closed the door from the office of K-K to the above association office to prevent the entry of the employees of the above company.

Defendants on March 17, 2016.

arrow