Housing Guro-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Masanro 5-ro 0

In the case of Kim Jong-si in the place of registration, Haak-si O

except that the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

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

On December 1, 2012, 01: around 40, the Defendant, at around 40, while drinking alcohol together with a daily drinking, such as o○, at the Guro-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Guro-dong ○○○○○○○○ (the age of 45) that was drinking on the table table, went to the o○○○○, while drinking alcohol on the side table, and drinking alcohol to the o○○○○. The Defendant, at around 40, went to the outside of the restaurant.

이에 피고인은 식당 밖으로 두 사람을 따라 나가, 피해자를 밀어 넘어뜨린 뒤 바닥에 넘어진 피해자의 얼굴 부위를 발로 2회 세게 걷어찼다 .

Accordingly, the Defendant caused a serious injury to the victim, which led to the real name of the victim due to the inside of the seat.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each police suspect interrogation protocol on ○○;

1. Each police protocol on the maximum ○○, Kim ○, and Park ○○;

1. Each written diagnosis (a list of evidence Nos. 7 and 13), and a written opinion (a list No. 16);

Application of Statutes

1. Article applicable to criminal facts;

Article 258(2) and (1) of the Criminal Act

2. Discretionary mitigation;

Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act (The following extenuating circumstances in favor of the reasons for sentencing)

3. Suspension of execution;

Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act

Judgment on the argument of the defendant and defense counsel

1. The assertion;

Although it is true that the defendant inflicted an injury on the face of the victim by launchinging the victim's face, it does not constitute a serious injury because the victim is not in the real name of the victim.

2. Determination

According to the evidence described in the summary of the evidence, ① the victim was under the daily spoppy of February 2, 2012 due to the internal heat and the electric emissions, and the maximum correction eyesight in the unit at the time was conducted on February 2, 2012, and ② the victim was under the opical popical spopic spopical spopic spopic spopic spopic spopic spopic spopic spopic spopic spopic spopic spopic spopic spopic spopic spopic spopic spopic spopic spopic spopic spopic spopic spopic spopic spopic spopic spopic spopic spopic spopic spopic sp.

1. The legal applicable range of sentencing

From six months to five years of imprisonment;

2. Scope of recommended sentences according to the sentencing criteria;

【Determination of Type] General Bodily Injury to Violence (Type 2)

【Special Convicted Persons】

- Reduction Elements: Non-Mitigation of Punishment

[Scope of Recommendation] From June to June (Reduction Area)

【Suspension of Execution】

- Major reasons for entry: positive - Non-prosecution of punishment

- General participation reasons: positive - contingent crimes, serious reflectivity, and the defendant's health condition; 3. Determination of sentence

The crime of this case for 10 months of imprisonment and 2 years of suspended execution is likely to result in the real name of the defendant, which leads to the side of the victim's face. However, it appears that the defendant committed the crime of this case by contingently during the process of running a criminal defendant's day-to-day and running with the victim who was placed a vision, and the victim seems to have committed the crime of this case. The victim does not want punishment against the defendant, the defendant's health status is not good, the defendant's character and behavior, environment, details and methods of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc., shall be determined as ordered within the recommended range according to the sentencing guidelines, by taking into account various sentencing factors specified in the arguments

Public Prosecution Rejection Parts

Of the facts charged in this case, we examine the fact that the defendant's cambling Kim○ in the process of defrancing Kim○ as indicated in the judgment of the court below and caused an influence of treatment days to Kim○○.

Since an injury in the crime of bodily injury refers to the injury of a victim's completeness or physiological function, it means that the degree of the injury is so minor that it can occur during his daily life, so it is not necessary to treat the injured party separately, and it is difficult to view that the injured party injured the completeness of the body or changed the state of health due to that circumstance, the crime of injury is not established (see Supreme Court Decision 2007Do1966, Jun. 28, 2007, etc.).

According to the statement of the police's statement on the Dol-man and Kim Hyun-ok, it can be acknowledged that even though the police's statement of the defendant was sealed and faced with the floor at the time of the case, he was faced with the right face her, and was faced with the upper part of the upper part of the her face her with the right face her, it was not treated or issued by the hospital. In light of this, it is not sufficient to recognize that the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone was injured at the time, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this otherwise.

Thus, the defendant cannot be punished as the crime of bodily injury and only the crime of assault can be established. The crime of assault is a crime falling under Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act, which cannot be prosecuted against the victim's express intent under Article 260 (3) of the Criminal Act. According to the agreement submitted by the defendant, Kim ○ can be recognized as the fact that he/she withdraws his/her wish to punish the defendant on June 23, 2013, which is after the prosecution of this case was instituted. Thus, the prosecution of this case is dismissed under Article 327 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Judge Long-term;

Judges Lee Jong-sung