(영문) 대구지방법원 2016.06.01 2015노3042 | 리걸엔진

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 대구지방법원 2016.06.01 2015노3042

소방시설공사업법위반

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The sentence of sentence shall be suspended for the defendant.

Reasons

1. The gist of the grounds of appeal is as follows: since the monitoring circuit on the water tank of this case falls under the control circuit of Article 2(1) [Attachment 1] of the Enforcement Decree of the Fire-Fighting Facility Construction Business Act, which is not the mechanical field but the fire-fighting facility subject to electricity field, and thus, the court below found the Defendant, who is the machinery construction business entity, guilty of the facts charged in this case. The judgment of the court below erred by misapprehending the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the Defendant’s ex officio, the Prosecutor’s judgment on the grounds for appeal was examined as follows: “The above place” among the facts charged in the instant case 7 is “from April 25, 2014 to May 15, 2014, E, etc.” and “the construction of surveillance circuits” of the eight parallels : “The construction of surveillance circuits is not installed,” and “the construction of surveillance circuits is not installed,” and the subject of the judgment against the Defendant was changed by this court’s permission. Therefore, the judgment below was no longer maintained.

B. Even if the judgment of the court below on the assertion of mistake of fact has the above reasons for reversal ex officio, the defendant's assertion of mistake of fact is still subject to the judgment of this court within the scope of the modified facts charged.

In the lower court’s assertion as to the grounds for appeal in this case, the lower court rejected the above assertion by explaining the lower court’s determination on the facts constituting a crime for which the statutory application of the judgment was applied, and comparing the above judgment with the records, the lower court’s determination is just and acceptable, and there is an error of law by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment, as alleged by the Defendant.

subsection (b) of this section.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

3. Conclusion.

유사 판례

-대법원 2016.08.30 2016도9417

-부산지방법원 2018.02.20 2017노3592

-대구지방법원 2017.09.22 2016노5633

-부산지방법원 2018.05.04 2018노231

-수원지방법원 2016.07.21 2015노6685