logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 진주지원 2015.11.26 2015고정279
상해
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,500,000.

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

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On September 17, 2014, the Defendant was operating a school bus in front of the ‘Tongsung Elementary School in Sacheon-si, Sacheon-si, Sacheon-si'. On the other hand, the Defendant found that the witness C, who was known prior to that place, had a dispute with the victim D with the traffic accident dealing with the traffic accident, and then found the victim “I am the young young in Sacheon-si,” and the victim “I am the victim’s why it was “, I am the victim?” and whether it was “I am the victim’s arms.”

As a result, the defendant suffered from the victim's 20-day medical treatment, leading to the left-hand side of the victim and the inspection.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of witness D;

1. Statement made to D by the police;

1. An injury diagnosis certificate (D);

1. The victim's photograph (the defendant and his defense counsel have a dispute with the victim, but there was no fact that the defendant has exercised a tangible power to the extent that the victim has suffered an injury, and the victim's wife does not constitute an injury under the Criminal Act, and the victim's wife's self-defense or defense constitutes self-defense. According to each of the above evidence, including the victim's legal statement, it can be sufficiently recognized that the defendant suffered an injury as stated in the victim's judgment, considering the victim's body and degree of the victim's body, etc., it is reasonable to deem that the victim's wife suffered an injury under the Criminal Act in light of the victim's body and degree of the victim's body. Considering the circumstances of the crime of this case, it cannot be deemed that the defendant's above act constitutes self-defense or defense against mistake. Thus, the defendant and his defense counsel's above assertion

1. Relevant Article of the Criminal Act and Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of penalties;

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

1. Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order;

arrow