logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2015.09.23 2015고정345
폭행
Text

The sentence of sentence against the defendant shall be suspended.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On September 2, 2014, the Defendant: (a) around 21:30, on the ground that the husband of the victim D (Woo, 55 years of age) who was on the top of the front of the vehicle operated by the victim before early early laping in Gwangjin-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City, told her her husband of the victim who was on the top of the operation of the laping vehicle, “I am immediately fright,” and called “I am back, I am am back, I am back,” and called “I am am, I am, I am, I am, I am, I am, I am, I am am am at the driver’s seat of the victim, and the victim was frightd with the victim’s shoulder who was on the lap of the lap, who was on the part of the lap.

Summary of Evidence

1. Part of the defendant's legal statement (the part concerning the sixth trial date, and the statement to the effect that there is a fact that the injured party was sweed about rice tea, etc. after the injured party was sweed away from the vehicle);

1. Witnesses D and E's respective legal statements;

1. Partial statement of the police interrogation protocol of the defendant;

1. Application of the police statement law to D;

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act and Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment;

1. Penalty fine of 500,000 won to be suspended;

1. Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act (100,000 won a day);

1. Determination as to the assertion by the defendant or his defense counsel under Article 59(1) of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., the age, character and conduct, intelligence and environment of the defendant, the background leading to the crime of this case, the relationship between the defendant and the victim, the degree of violence is minor, and the primary crime)

1. There is no fact that the Defendant had the victim as stated in the facts charged against him in the instant case (hereinafter “the paper of this case”).

However, after the victim had the paper of this case out of the vehicle, there is a fact that the victim had a fluence of rice disaster sway away from the road, and again had a fluence toward the vehicle.

arrow