logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.11.08 2018노2337
상해
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant, at the time of the instant case by misunderstanding the facts and misapprehension of the legal doctrine, was involved in the Defendant’s flabing the bat at the time of the instant case. However, there was no flabing the head by hand and walking the bridge, and the victim did not have any injury as stated in the facts charged due to the Defendant’s assault.

Nevertheless, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case with the victim’s unilateral statement only and erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2000Du1500,000,000,000,000).

2. Determination

A. (1) As to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts and legal principles, the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, namely, the victim’s investigative agency and court at the lower court’s trial, are highly specific and consistent with the background of the assault committed against the Defendant, the course of the assault, and the part of the assault.

In addition, the contents of the statement are consistent with the facts charged in the instant case, while the Defendant faces with the wall by putting both arms and lower parts of the victim and the body fighting with the victim, and knee and knee and fele with the wind over which they are pushed, following the occurrence of the instant case.

“In addition, the statement(7 page of the evidence record) that the victim argued as the victim was submitted during the police interrogation process, and thereafter, the victim’s body was found to have flabed on the part of the victim by using the damaged photograph (20 pages of the evidence record) submitted during the police interrogation process, and only recognized the victim’s flabing, and continuously denied the victim’s flabing and other acts. In light of the Defendant’s statement attitude or the circumstances of the case.

arrow