강요등
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is without merit that the Defendant committed a harmful act identical to that stated in the facts charged of this case against the victim.
During the marriage period, the victim sold the defendant's property to the defendant and tried to achieve his/her intention by having the defendant detained the defendant by self-harm that the defendant did not respond to it. In the case of this case, the victim did harm in favor of the above reasons and divorce and division of property, and the victim voluntarily prepared and delivered to the defendant.
2. Facts charged;
A. At around 20:00 on June 20, 2012, the Defendant suspected that the Defendant’s wife of the Defendant (hereinafter “the Defendant”), at the Defendant’s home located in Gumisisisisi, sisisisi (hereinafter “the Defendant”), she saw the Defendant as “the Defendant’s wife of the Defendant (hereinafter “the age of 51”) to avoid wind,” and she saw the Victim as “the Victim, a day, a day, a day, a large number of years, a day, a day, a day, and the Victim’s face as a result, she saw the Victim’s face once again, and she took the Victim’s title once again, she sawd the Victim for approximately two weeks of treatment.
(2) Around 01:00 on June 30, 2012, the Defendant: (a) under the influence of alcohol at the foregoing place; (b) caused the victim’s face and her breast part, etc. on the ground that the victim had worked and returned late; and (c) caused the victim to suffer bodily injury, such as catum dump, which requires approximately three weeks of treatment.
B. Around 01:00 on June 30, 2012, the Defendant forced the Defendant to prepare five copies of the joints that read, “The Defendant did not file a complaint against the victim,” who assaulted the victim at the aforementioned place, and that he did not raise any objection against the victim who was drinking, even if he did not go to go against, due to a mistake in the process of doing so.” (hereinafter “instant joints”).
As such, the Defendant does not have a duty to assault the victim and let the victim frighten.