beta
(영문) 대전지방법원 서산지원 2018.02.13 2017고정147

폭행등

Text

1. Of the facts charged in the instant case, the charge of assaulting among the facts charged in the instant case is acquitted.

Reasons

Parts of innocence

1. The facts charged [2017 High Court 147] The Defendant suspected of the victim D(53 tax, female)’s external limit in the case of Seosan-si B around March 4, 2017, around 22:55, in the case of Seosan-si (2017 High Court 2017 High Court 147) and promised to do so.

“In the hands of the victim, the victim was injured by double strings, strings, strings, and dogs, strings, and strings, and strings, which require two-day medical treatment by putting the victim’s head with his/her left hand in the parking lot, and cutting the victim’s head with his/her head, and cutting the victim’s head over the floor.

[2017 High 241] On July 2, 2017, the Defendant suffered injury to the victim, such as spawn on the left side of the part of the victim, spawn, spawn and spawn blood transfusion, etc., on the left side of the part of the victim, on the ground that the victim thought the F, the Defendant’s seat, as the Defendant’s female, was able to take a bath.

2. The reliable evidence that corresponds to each of the facts charged in the instant case is the witness D’s statement, and in light of the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the record, D’s statement is difficult to believe and other evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone was proven without reasonable doubt.

It is insufficient to view it, and there is no other evidence to prove it.

[2017 High 147] A witness G testified from this court after the Defendant and the victim appeared in the singing room. While the Defendant led the victim, the Defendant did not assault the victim, scam the victim’s scam, or scam the victim’s head, and stated that the victim did not have any fact beyond the floor.

Witness

G In full view of the rationality of the content of testimony as a third party in the instant case, the testimony of a witness, the degree of interest in the case of a witness, and the relationship with the parties, G may believe the witness G’s legal statement.

At the same time, H, I, and J did not cause disputes about the extent that the defendant would injure the victim.