beta
Text
Defendants are not guilty. The summary of each judgment against the Defendants is publicly announced.
Reasons
1. On May 14, 2013, at around 19:54, the Defendants jointly committed an act of assaulting the victim E in front of the vehicle in front of the Defendant B, on the ground that the victim E parked in front of the D apartment 102, Namyang-si, Namyang-si, on the ground that the victim E parked in front of the vehicle in front of the Defendant B. Defendant A committed an act of assaulting the victim, i.e., using the e-spathro, getting out of the vehicle, taking a bath, walking the bridge, and walking the bridge. Defendant B committed an act of assaulting the victim, such as flading the e-spath and tension, thereby causing injury to E for 14 days.
2. Defendant B alleged that the Defendants’ assertion was not at the site of this case, and Defendant A asserted that there was no assault against E as described in the facts charged, and denied the facts charged.
3. Judgment on Defendant B
A. At this court, F witnessed the instant case in this court, at the first place, there was one person with whom the Defendants and one person with whom they had worked (2 pages of the witness examination protocol of F), and at the same time, Defendant B was found to have been on the job when Defendant A and the person with whom they had come to work (4, 11 pages of the witness examination protocol as mentioned above), and F made a statement that Defendant B had not been on the job (4, 11 pages of the witness examination protocol as well). Since there was no circumstance to see that there was a friendly relationship with the Defendants or E as D apartment security guards, F’s statement is only reliable.
B. At the time, G, which was the one of the Defendants at the time, was also in this court, and Defendant B, as Defendant B was aware of his finding and promising to find, and thus, Defendant A and E did not appear at the site when Defendant A and E carried out ditches (3,7,9 pages of the examination of witness to G), and consistent with F’s above statements.
[Defendant B also stated that the police would get off from the train, and that the equipment of the above Defendant was getting out of the train (the 29 pages of investigation record).
E, at the police station, after Defendant A sleeped himself from the train, Defendant B was flated with his flat.