폭행
The Defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment of this case is publicly notified.
1. The summary of the facts charged is a person who is acting on behalf of “D” as an incorporated foundation in Daegu Northern-gu C or seven floors.
On December 4, 2015, at around 20:20 on December 4, 2015, the Defendant participated in the exchange seminars between the CEO and university students in the F hotel 1 restaurant located in E, and the Defendant was working in the same workplace G (V, 31 years old) with the victim G (V, 31 years old).
During that period, the defendant, who was under the influence of alcohol, abused the victim's head at one time while playing the meeting room with the axis of college students present at the above seminars.
2. The evidence presented as shown in the above facts charged is that the witness G’s statement in the third trial protocol, each recording record (the telephone conversations with H and I), and the J Department’s Kakakakao Stockholm. However, in light of the situation before and after the time of the instant case, the witness J’s statement in the third trial protocol, the witness H’s legal statement in the witness H, the investigation report (related to witness I and H telephone statement) in the third trial protocol, it is difficult to believe that the witness G’s statement in the third trial protocol is written as it is, and ② H and I are “N” in the currency with G.
D.
D.
D.
The part stating “.... example,” or “C........” is not sufficient to acknowledge the facts charged only with each recording (C. H and I telephone conversations with H and I) showing that it was courtesy in the course of conversation. ③ The J Department’s Kakao Stockholm conversation is a conversation that was based on the statements made by J from G, so long as it is not possible to believe the above G’s statement, the Defendant assaulted G solely on the basis of the above Kakao Stockholm Stockholm conversation.
It is difficult to see it.
The remainder of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is insufficient to admit the above facts charged, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.
3. In conclusion, the facts charged in this case constitute a case where there is no proof of crime, and thus, the defendant is acquitted by the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the summary of the judgment against the defendant under Article 58(2) of the Criminal Act.