logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 고양지원 2014.11.20 2014고단242
재물손괴
Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant was operating D Co., Ltd. from around September 2012 to August 2013, 2013, and the said company, which was owned by the victim E, is operating soup by leasing from the victim the FF underground 1 to 2, and the ground 1 to 4 (hereinafter “instant building”) to “G” from June 21, 2004.

On November 27, 2012, the above lease contract was terminated, and on August 16, 2013, the Seoul Central District Court 2012Gahap102020 delivered the building to the victim.

On September 17, 2013, the Defendant ordered human parts to restore the instant building to its original state at the foregoing place on September 17, 2013, and ordered them to cut off arbitrarily electric wires owned by the victim, which were installed in the first to the second to the ground, the first to the fourth to the fourth to the power distribution team, etc. of the instant building, thereby impairing its utility by damaging the electric wires equivalent to KRW 54,814,00 for repair cost.

2. The records of this case are as follows: ① the defendant ordered the complainant to remove the facility to fulfill his duty of restoration as lessee according to the judgment ordering the complainant to deliver the building of this case; ② the defendant did not point out or supervise the object of removal directly at the site of removal; ② the police officer called to the site upon receiving the 112 report from the complainant, sent to the site upon the 112 report by the complainant, was the defendant at the time of this court, but the defendant sent the telephone communications with the defendant at the time of this court, but the defendant stated that the defendant did not memory as to whether the defendant instructed the cutting of the wire; ③ At the time, I was aware of the fact that the defendant instructed the son to cut the wire; ③ at the time, I stated that the 30 persons did not remove the wire at the site of delivery; ④ The defendant did not cut off the electrical wires in fact.

arrow