logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 제주지방법원 2020.12.24 2020노217
업무방해등
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In relation to the mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, there was a fact that the Defendant intended to take a bath at the time of the instant case, but there was no fact that the victim’s business was obstructed by gathering plastic chairs, etc..

3) In relation to the point of assault, although the Defendant committed assault against the victim B, it constitutes self-defense since he/she was placed a food by doing an act to defend against the victim as he/she was injured first, it constitutes self-defense. B. The sentence imposed by the lower court of unfair sentencing (two months of imprisonment, two years of suspended sentence, two years of probation order, and 80 hours of community service order is too unreasonable.

2. Determination on the grounds for appeal

A. As to the allegation of mistake of facts and misapprehension of the legal principles, the defendant alleged that the defendant only expressed his desire at the time of the instant case and did not interfere with the victim's business. However, the defendant also expressed the fact that the defendant took a credit card with the intent of the victim. According to the video taken by a police officer dispatched to the scene at the time, the defendant is in the face of a disturbance, such as avoiding disturbance within the main place after the police officer was dispatched, gathering the child within the main place, and changing the alcohol with a large voice to the business owner. In full view of the fact that the defendant's act causes considerable interference with the victim's business, such as the defendant's behavior, leaving the customers in the restaurant at the time of the instant case or leaving other customers not enter the restaurant at the time of the instant case, the judgment of the court below that found this part of the facts charged is justified, and the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty and erred in the misapprehension of the legal principles on the facts charged by the defendant.

arrow