beta
(영문) 수원지방법원 안산지원 2018.05.15 2018고정110

상해

Text

The defendant is innocent.

Reasons

1. The Defendant and C, the gist of the instant facts charged, were the satisfy relationship with the satisfy.

The Defendant, at around 16:00 on September 8, 2017, expressed that the victim C cannot see himself/herself and son in the “E” mobile phone store located in Silung-si D in Silung-si, and expressed his/her desire to “the value of taxing and treating in the Republic of Korea during the same year as the three years in which he/she sold his/her arms” and “the value of taxing and treating in the Republic of Korea during the course of a dispute.”

Around 2 weeks of treatment was required for the victim, such as the victim's left side bucks around three times with the floor of hand, and the victim's multi-locks were placed on the victim's side.

2. The defendant asserts to the effect that some physical contact and assault were acknowledged, but that the assault did not cause harm to C.

Examining the written diagnosis of injury, it is recognized that there is a fact that the part of the injury was indicated as “the part of the part of the offwater and the part of the front part” in the column of the part and the degree of the injury, and therefore, the part of the part of the injury was committed by the Defendant, and the part of the on-site CCTV was only a part of the part of the Defendant’s chest with the second part of the part of the Defendant’s chest, but only a part of the part of the Defendant’s chest with the second part of the part of the hand hand, did not seem to be a part of the part of the Defendant’s chest, and rather the part of the Defendant’s part of the part of the hand hand that the police attempted not to go out to the outside of the canter and left out of the canter. Therefore, the Defendant suffered the injury

It is difficult to see it.

3. In conclusion, the facts charged in this case constitute a case where there is no proof of crime, and thus, a judgment of innocence is rendered after the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the judgment is rendered as per Disposition with the intention not to disclose the summary of this judgment under the proviso of Article 58(2) of the Criminal Act.