logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2012.11.16 2011고정4397
재물손괴등
Text

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

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a person living together with the victim C.

1. Damage to property;

A. On July 21, 201, at around 16:00, the Defendant opened a door at which the market price of the victim’s possession is unknown from the victim C’s residence, Nam-gu, Incheon Metropolitan City, Do 202.

B. On July 26, 2011, the Defendant: (a) at around 12:00 on July 26, 201, the Defendant: (b) told the victim C to leave the house at the place indicated in the port of paragraph (a) that the victim C would not bring the victim’s goods; (c) carried the laundry machine in which the market price, which is the victim’s ownership, cannot be identified; and (d) broken the cremation, cremation, cremation, photographor, etc.

Accordingly, the defendant damaged the property owned by the victim.

2. The Defendant, at the time and place specified in paragraph 1-b, assaulted the Victim E (the 16-year-old age) on the same ground as Paragraph 1-b, and assaults the Victim’s bridge at one time due to electric contact.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of witness E;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on the spot and of violence photo;

1. Relevant Articles 366 and 260 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts. Article 260 (Selection of Fine)

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

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

1. The defendant and his/her defense counsel on the argument of the defendant and his/her defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act alleged that the defendant did not have assaulted the victim E, but according to the macroscopic evidence, the fact that the defendant used the above victim

Therefore, the above argument is not accepted.

arrow