beta
(영문) 대전지방법원 천안지원 2015.01.07 2014고단952

상해

Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

On November 8, 2012, the summary of the facts charged in the instant case is as follows: (a) around 11:50 on November 8, 2012, the Defendant, at the E-friendly F agency office located in Dong-gu, Chungcheongnam-gu, Dong-gu, Dong-gu, Dong-gu, Seoul, for the following reasons: (b) the husband of the victim G (n, 63 years of age) and the husband of the victim H and the claim for milk payment; and (c) the said victim’s damage was inflicted on the victim, resulting in the Defendant’s injury, such as a tent franchis and thale, which requires approximately four weeks of treatment.

The defendant denies the above facts charged, consistent to the police, the prosecution, and this court. The witness I's statement, as shown in the facts charged, is hard to believe in full view of the following: (a) I filed a criminal complaint and civil lawsuit against the defendant on the ground of unpaid retirement allowance; and (b) in civil procedure, I would like to establish mediation in which I would pay KRW 7 million to the defendant; (c) I would like to contact the victim first after retirement from the defendant's agency to the victim first, and receive KRW 200,000 from the victim for rent, etc.; and (d) it is difficult to view that the defendant suffered injury that requires approximately KRW 4 weeks medical treatment on the part of the victim.

In addition, it is difficult to believe that the victim, the victim, the victim, and the police statement of the victim, the victim, and the victim of each police statement of the H are not only the facts charged to the effect that the defendant injured the victim by hand, but also the victim's hand, but also the other witness's statement. The victim and H were in conflict with the other witness's statement. The victim and the victim were in conflict with the defendant as a matter of friendly demand on the day of the case, and violence and obstruction of business were committed during that process. The site of this case is narrow and narrow, and it is difficult to readily conclude that the victim exceeded the victim was the defendant. In full view of the fact that it is difficult to conclude that it was caused by the defendant, each injury diagnosis report, the document submitted as evidence.