【충북 브레이크뉴스】임창용 기자=운전기사에게 폭언과 욕설 등을 한 혐의로 기소된 김윤배(사진) 청주대학교 총장에 대해 대법원이 최종 무죄를 선고했다.

대법원 제1부(주심 대법관 노태악)는 8일 강요 혐의로 불구속 기소된 김 총장에 대해 검찰의 상고를 기각했다.

이에 따라 김 총장은 1심과 2심에 이어 대법원까지 최종 무죄가 확정됐다.

앞서 김 총장은 운전기사 A씨에게 폭언과 욕설, 업무 외 잡무를 지시한 혐의로 재판에 넘겨졌다.

그러나 1, 2심 재판부는 피고인의 행위가 음주운전 면허취소로 운전기사 역할을 할 수 없는 A씨의 생계유지를 도우려 했던 것일 뿐, A씨의 의사에 반해 어떤 행위를 강제하려 했던 것으로 보이지 않는다고 판시했다.

당시 재판부는 “피해자는 2000년 음주운전으로 면허가 취소됐고 운전기사로 근무할 수 없는 상황이었다”며 “고용관계를 유지하면서 잡무를 담당하게 한 것은 피해자의 요청에 따라 생계유지를 위한 배려조치로 보인다”고 밝혔다.

이어 “욕설을 한 것은 답답한 심정을 즉흥적으로 표출한 것으로 보인다”며 “의무가 없는 일을 강제하려 하거나 피해자의 의사결정을 방해할 정도로 해약의 고지라고 보기는 어렵다”고 강조했다.

특히 2심 재판부는 “1심 판단을 뒤집을 만한 증거가 제출되지 않았다”며 “2심에서 예비 공소사실로 추가한 근로기준법 위반(강제 근로)도 인정하기 어렵다”고 판시했다.

The following is [the full text] of the English article translated by 'Google Translate'. 'Google Translate' is working hard to improve understanding. It is assumed that there may be errors in the English translation.) 

Cheongju University President Kim Yun-bae acquitted by Supreme Court on suspicion of abuse of power by driver

Following the first and second trials, the Supreme Court finally confirmed not guilty.

-im changyong reporter

The Supreme Court finally acquitted Kim Yun-bae, president of Cheongju University, who was indicted on charges of verbally abusing and swearing at a driver.

On the 8th, the First Division of the Supreme Court (Chief Justice Noh Tae-ak) dismissed the prosecution's appeal against President Kim, who was indicted without detention on charges of coercion.

Accordingly, President Kim was finally found not guilty by the Supreme Court following the first and second trials.

Previously, Prosecutor General Kim was handed over to trial on charges of verbally abusing and swearing at driver A and ordering him to do chores other than work.

However, the 1st and 2nd trial courts ruled that the defendant's actions were merely an attempt to help Mr. A, who was unable to act as a driver due to a revoked drunk driving license, to make a living, and did not appear to be an attempt to force Mr. A to do something against his will. It was decided.

At the time, the court said, “The victim’s license was revoked for drunk driving in 2000 and he was in a situation where he could not work as a driver.” “Maintaining him in charge of chores while maintaining an employment relationship appears to have been a considerate measure to maintain his livelihood at the victim’s request.” “He said.

He continued, “It seems that the use of profanity was a spontaneous expression of frustration,” and emphasized, “It is difficult to view it as a notice of cancellation to the extent of trying to force something that is not obligatory or interfering with the victim’s decision-making.”

In particular, the second trial court ruled that “no evidence was submitted to overturn the first trial judgment,” and that “it is difficult to acknowledge the violation of the Labor Standards Act (forced labor) added as a preliminary indictment in the second trial.”