(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2018.06.28 2017고단5326

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) 서울북부지방법원 2018.06.28 2017고단5326

업무방해

Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On May 13, 2016, the Defendant was sentenced to one year of imprisonment and two years of suspended execution due to interference with the execution of official duties by the Seoul Northern District Court, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on the 21st of the same month.

On September 29, 2017, from around 21:00 to 21:30 on the same day, the Defendant was unable to play a disturbance for about 30 minutes for other customers while drinking alcoholic beverages within the “F frequency” operated by the victim E in Gangseo-gu Seoul, Gangnam-gu, Seoul, 2017. The Defendant was able to do so, with his hand, flags, walked with his hand, walked with theme, walked several times, walked with theme, walked with theme, and talked with the other customers within the frequency, and talked with a large amount of voice.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the victim's main business by force.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. E statements;

1. Application of the F frequency CCTV-related Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act and Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act (the point of interference with business and the choice of imprisonment);

1. Grounds for sentencing under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The scope of the recommended punishment [the scope of the recommended punishment] according to the sentencing guidelines shall interfere with the affairs of the recommendation [the scope of the recommended punishment], and the area of mitigation (one month to eight months) [the person subject to special mitigation] shall not be punished (including the person subject to serious efforts to recover damage);

2. Although the defendant who was sentenced to the suspended sentence did not commit a crime interfering with business without being involved in the suspended sentence, there are many similar forces.

However, the court has determined the punishment as ordered by comprehensively taking into account the following factors: (a) the victim complained of the Defendant’s wife; (b) the Defendant appears to be aware of and reflect in depth on the Defendant’s age, environment; (c) the motive, means and method of committing the crime; and (d) the circumstances after committing the crime.

참조조문

-형법 제62조 제1항

-형법 제314조 제1항

유사 판례

-부산지방법원 2017.04.21 2017고단282

-인천지방법원 2018.10.31 2018고단6401

-의정부지방법원 고양지원 2017.03.24 2016고단3731

-광주지방법원 장흥지원 2016.03.31 2015고단213

-대전지방법원 논산지원 2017.06.16 2017고단217