(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2019.05.15 2018고정977

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) 서울서부지방법원 2019.05.15 2018고정977

재물손괴

Text

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

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won shall be one day.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On March 31, 2018, at around 03:10, the Defendant: (a) stated in the indictment that “the Defendant is going to walk with a parking-prohibited sign that is set up in front of Mapo-gu Seoul, without any justifiable reason,” but the witness C’s statement corresponding thereto appears to be somewhat inaccurate as seen below appears to have been seen in the summary of the evidence; (b) even CCTV images in which the crime scene is located, it is not confirmed that the Defendant acted with a parking-prohibited sign that is carried out by hand, but it is confirmed that the above parking-prohibited sign is sealed.

The defendant's defense counsel argues that the defendant's defense counsel has carried the above parking prohibition sign in his hand.

This part of the facts charged is deemed to have no impediment to the defendant's exercise of his/her right of defense, even if the defendant acknowledged that "the defendant's signboards prohibited from parking are sealed by hand." Thus, the facts charged are recognized as above.

After that, the part of the part of the victim C in front of the DMW vehicle (hereinafter referred to as the "victimed vehicle") was damaged by the 5 cm.

Summary of Evidence

1. C’s legal statement;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes of CDs images attached to photographs of damaged vehicles, photographs, investigation reports (the confirmation report of whether they are true or not);

1. Article 36 of the Criminal Act and Article 366 of the Criminal Act concerning the crime, the choice of fines;

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

1. The assertion by the defendant and his/her defense counsel under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act;

1. The alleged defendant and the defense counsel have a fact that the defendant carried a sign of no parking prohibition which was set up in front of the damaged vehicle in his hand, but the sign of no parking prohibition is used only on the floor without having contact with the damaged vehicle. Thus, the damage caused by the damaged vehicle is caused by the defendant's act.

참조조문

유사 판례

-서울서부지방법원 2019.12.12 2019노686

-서울중앙지방법원 2019.10.22 2019고단4508

-수원지방법원 평택지원 2017.08.30 2016고정534

-수원지방법원 안산지원 2013.03.20 2013고단152

-서울남부지방법원 2020.05.28 2019나54786