beta
(영문) 춘천지방법원 강릉지원 2017.07.06 2017고단623

폭행등

Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Of the facts charged in this case, the prosecution against assault against C is dismissed.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On August 5, 2016, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for six months with prison labor for the crime of injury at the Gangnam Branch Branch of the Chuncheon District Court on August 5, 2016, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on August 13, 2016 and is still under the suspension of execution.

1. On May 25, 2017, the Defendant: (a) 20:25 on May 25, 2017, the Defendant was able to avoid disturbance, such as entering the “E main points” located in Gangnam-si D without any justifiable reason, taking a bath without any reason; (b) humping the victim’s face from the victim F (46 years of age) who had drinking alcohol at that place; and (c) humping the victim’s face at one time.

Accordingly, the defendant assaulted the victim.

2. In the same date and time as the above paragraph 1 above, the injured Defendant was removed from the Victim G G (W, 54 years old), the owner of the above main shop at the same place, and caused the injury to the victim, by putting the victim's neck into a scam and scambing the scam, and making the scam strong scams by scaming the scam of the victim, thereby causing the injury to the victim, such as the left part of the treatment days and the right part of the treatment days.

3. On May 25, 2017, the Defendant continued to have been expelled from the security guards I of the Gangnam Police Station who called out after receiving a report at the same place as the above paragraph (1) at around 20:34, at the same time as the above paragraph (1).

C et al. calculated the drinking value and tried to go out of the above main points, and tried to drive away.

As the Defendant was placed at the bar from I, he expressed that he was “I’s chest to scam scam to scam,” and carried I’s chest in two hands.

As a result, the Defendant interfered with police officers' legitimate performance of duties in relation to 112 reporting duties.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement made with respect to I, G, and F;

1. Written Statement;

1. Each photograph;

1. Details of receipt of reports;

1. A previous conviction: A reply to inquiries, such as criminal history, the list of the case and the text of the judgment.