beta
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2015.08.17 2015고단1540

상해

Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The defendant was in a de facto marital relationship with the victim B (the age of 44), and was in a de facto marital relationship with the victim, and the defendant and the victim were born.

At around 05:00 on April 6, 2015, the Defendant: (a) sought a dialogue with the victim regarding the issue of coming from the said child’s home in Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Nowon-gu, Seoul, about 05:0; (b) but the victim refused such dialogue; (c) was able to see the victim’s face and body, etc. due to drinking and growth, and caused injury to the victim, such as the spatha, the spatha of the wall and the spatha of the upper part of the upper part of the 5-day upper part of the upper part of the upper part of the 5-day upper part of the road.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Protocol of the police statement concerning B;

1. Application of each medical certificate, written confirmation of release on admission, and statutes governing damaged photographs;

1. Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crime;

1. The sentence shall be imposed on the defendant in consideration of the reason (the range of recommendations) for the sentencing of alternative punishment of imprisonment with prison labor [the range of recommendations] general injury (the period of six to two years), the aggravation area (the period of six months and two years) (the person who is specially under command] [the decision of sentence] the injury (the period of one and four years), the injury (the period of one and four years) committed by violence for the reason that it is impossible to obtain a female victim, causing serious injury to the extent that it is necessary to conduct an external operation, the victim wants to punish the defendant, etc., but the punishment shall be set at the lowest limit of the recommended sentence in consideration of the fact that the defendant has no history of punishment for the same kind of crime, the fact that the defendant has committed contingent crimes, the fact that