beta
(영문) 광주지방법원 2013.06.11 2013고정566

모욕

Text

1. Defendant B shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,00,000.

Defendant

B does not pay the above fine.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. At around 12:40 on October 7, 2012, Defendant B (hereinafter in this paragraph “Defendant”) told the victim I, the husband of H, who was the husband of the GJ in North-gu, Gwangju, to the effect that “I were not aware of the fraud at the JJ meeting, and thus, I and the JJ has been committed fraud at H and the JJ meeting, and that I would like to say, “I would have been drinking money at the JJ meeting, so I would have come to know how much the fraud has been changed.” The Defendant insultd the victim by expressing the victim’s warning abstractly by an abstract judgment from the place where there are about 30 members of the school.

2. On October 12, 2012, around 12:25, Defendant A (hereinafter “Defendant”) stated that the victim I (the age of 59) was able to go to a meeting room on the ground that the victim I (the age of 59) fell to go to a meeting room on the 1st floor of the above Gridge conference, and the victim’s hand and larlars were able to read “dubing” in the two indictments, and the victim’s hand and larlars were pushed to read “dubing” in the two indictments. However, according to the witness I’s statement, the Defendant was able to get “a large” and changed to “the body of the victim.”

The victim assaulted the victim by physically pushing the victim's chests, etc. which was shaking, boomed, and avoided it.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant B’s legal statement and part of Defendant A’s legal statement

1. Each legal statement of I, H and K;

1. Application of film Acts and subordinate statutes to CDs (videoCCTV);

1. Relevant Article of the Act and the choice of punishment for the crime;

A. Defendant B: Article 311 of the Criminal Act (Influence and Selection of Fine)

B. Defendant A: Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of violence and the choice of fines)

1. Determination as to the assertion by the Defendant A and his defense counsel under Articles 70 and 69(2) of the Criminal Act

1. Defendant A (hereinafter “Defendant”) asserted the date and time stated in the facts of the crime, and at the place, as the victim was somewhat poor, the victim deemed the victim as a party room in bad condition with the victim, and the victim was spawned, and the victim was spawn. As stated in the facts of the crime.