logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2017.08.04 2017노1994
업무방해
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The sentence imposed by the lower court (six months of imprisonment) on the summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable.

2. The Defendant recognized the instant crime, and thereby is against his mistake.

The victims submitted a written agreement in the investigative agency and the court below stating the intention to take the action against the defendant, and the family members of the defendant want to take the action against the defendant.

The defendant is suffering from alcohol dependence, depression, etc., and health conditions are not good.

However, there was a mental and physical weakness of the defendant due to such health condition.

In addition, it is difficult to see that the crime of this case was committed by the Defendant under the influence of alcohol without any particular reason, or obstructed the victims’ business operation by using violence or avoiding disturbance. In light of the circumstances, method, etc. of the crime of this case, the case is somewhat minor

subsection (b) of this section.

In addition, even though the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol to commit violent inclinations, such as obstruction of duties and damage to property, and had been punished several times, the Defendant committed the instant crime against the victims who did not mislead the victims while under the influence of alcohol during the period of repeated crime due to interference with duties, etc., and the responsibility for the instant crime is not easy, and most recent crimes committed by the Defendant are against the residents living in the vicinity of the Defendant’s residence. The instant crime is similar to the instant case. Even if the degree of damage by each individual crime is not significant, the Defendant’s obstruction of duties is a crime of a nature that causes a great damage to those living in the workplace in good faith, and cannot be held liable for the Defendant who does not seem to have a strong intent to improve the individual crime while repeating the same type of crime.

Various of these circumstances, the defendant's age, sex, environment, relationship with victims, motive, means and consequence of the crime of this case, and various sentencing conditions shown in the records and arguments, such as the circumstances after the crime, and the Supreme Court.

arrow