logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 성남지원 2016.06.09 2016고정172
폭력행위등처벌에관한법률위반(공동재물손괴등)
Text

Defendant

B Fines 2,00,000 won, Defendant A and C shall be fined 1,00,000 won, Defendant D and E shall be fined 500,000 won, respectively.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

1)A, the G representative director, Defendant 2)B, the commercial rental company, and the executive director of the above company, Defendant 3) H, the managing director of the above company, Defendant 4)C, and Defendant 5) D, as the commercial rental company, sell new products at the J station and K connections, and Defendant 6) E sell fies at the above location.

1. Defendants 1)A, 2)B, and 4)C of co-property damage, including Defendant 1, on June 6, 2015, at the entrance of J Station L in Sungnam-si, Sungnam-si, and K passage, Defendant 1, at their own discretion removed the banner (road 3m x 0.7m m m x ) equivalent to the market price established in M (52 m x m x 0.7m m ) from the entrance of the J Station and the passage of K branch office in Sungnam-si, Sungnam-si.

Accordingly, the Defendants jointly damaged the property managed by the damaged person.

2. Defendant 2(B) and 3(H’s joint property damage around June 2, 2015, at the entrance of the above passage around 17:18, the Defendants arbitrarily removed the banner (4m x 1.2m m x ) equivalent to 100,000 won at the market price established, which is a public official of the Gu branch office in Sungnam-si, the victim Sungnam-si. (52 m x 52m).

Accordingly, the Defendants jointly damaged the property managed by the injured party.

3. On August 29, 2015, Defendants 5(D) and 6(E’s joint property damage caused damage to the victim’s property by arbitrarily removing the banner (breadth 3 x 1.2m) equivalent to the market value of KRW 30,000 at the entrance of the above passage, which is a public official of the Gu branch office of the victim Sung-nam City (52 aged) from the victim Sung-nam City.

Accordingly, the Defendants jointly damaged the property managed by the injured party.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. A protocol concerning the examination of suspect of H with respect to the police;

1. Each police statement made with respect to M and N;

1. Written charge, accompanying documents, and photographs;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes for investigation reporting;

1. Article 2 (2) and Article 2 (1) 1 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act concerning the facts constituting an offense, Article 366 of the Criminal Act;

1. Selection of an alternative fine for punishment (which reflects all mistakes, and the relevant banner is in dispute at the store of this case;

arrow