(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2019.05.13 2019고정399

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2019.05.13 2019고정399

폭행

Text

A defendant shall be punished by a fine of 500,000 won.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a person who resides in B building C and victim D (57 years of age) in B building E.

On November 07, 2018, the Defendant, at around 15:35, 2018, committed assault against the victim’s left side part of the building F 2nd floor B, on the ground that, while the Defendant was trying to operate an electronic file in order to cut off the victim, the Defendant pushed the victim’s body in front, and then pushed the victim into a wall on the ground that he was “I would go to go to her seat,” and that the victim was “I would go to go to go to her seat.”

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Statement made to D by the police;

1. Field CCTV CDs;

1. Application of statutes on field CCTV photographs;

1. Relevant Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts, the choice of a fine, and the choice of a fine;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The defendant and his defense counsel asserted as to the assertion of the defendant and his defense counsel under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the defendant and his defense counsel asserted that they would enjoy the victim's arms in a way that the victim seeks to purchase and defend the defendant first, which constitutes self-defense. However, according to the evidence duly adopted and investigated by this court, the defendant can only be found to have exercised the victim's tangible power as stated in the facts charged, and there is no objective circumstance that the defendant tried to purchase the defendant by first selling, and there is no objective circumstance that the victim tried to purchase the defendant. Furthermore, even if such circumstance is acknowledged, it is difficult to view that the type of the defendant's own force was dynamicly and passive to defend the victim's prior attack, and thus, it cannot be deemed that the elements for establishing self-defense are satisfied.

The above assertion is not accepted.

참조조문

유사 판례

-청주지방법원 2014.12.12 2014노691

-인천지방법원 2017.08.25 2017고합219

-의정부지방법원 2015.06.09 2015노331

-서울동부지방법원 2013.11.22 2013고정2516

-부산지방법원 동부지원 2013.09.30 2013고정405