Defendant 1 and five others

Captain Maternity

Law Firm Seoho et al.

1. Defendant 1 shall be punished by imprisonment for 45 years, by imprisonment for 30 years, by imprisonment for 25 years, by imprisonment for Defendant 4, by imprisonment for 25 years, by imprisonment for Defendant 5, by imprisonment for 15 years and by imprisonment for 6 months, respectively.

2.Provided, That with respect to Defendant 6, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for six months from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive;

1. Joint principal offenders committed by Defendants 1, 2, 3, and 4

(a) Injury or death;

피고인들은 2014. 4. 6. 16:07경 경기도 연천군 (주소 1 생략)에 있는 소속대 의무반 생활관에서 피해자 공소외 3(20세)과 함께 냉동식품을 먹던 중 피해자가 음식을 쩝쩝거리고 먹으며 질문에 대답이 늦는다는 등의 이유로 별지 범죄일람표 1.항 기재와 같이 피해자를 때려 같은 날 16:33경 피해자가 정신을 잃고 쓰러지게 함으로써 상해를 가하였다.

On April 7, 2014, around 16:20 on April 7, 2014, the Defendants caused the death of victims who were treated by the ○○ University Hospital located at the △△△△△△△△△ Hospital located at the ○○ University Hospital located in the Dong-si of Gyeonggi-do, Gyeonggi-do.

Accordingly, the Defendants conspired to injure the victim and caused the death.

(b) Damage to property;

The Defendants, after using the victim Nonindicted 3 (20 years of age) due to their own assault, sent back to a hospital, the Defendants had the possibility that they would be able to find out the victim's use due to their assault, cruel acts, etc., and had the intent to enter their crimes or to throw away the victim's belongings related to the crime.

At around 08:00 on April 7, 2014, Defendants 4 discovered a victim’s water counter, a sprinkler, and a pocket book, and found Defendant 2, Defendant 1, and Defendant 2 confirmed the contents, and Defendant 2 laid down the 15 degree of 15 degree from the said strip and pocket book, and Defendant 3 laid down two yellow-ray mining in a separate collection book with the victim’s name.

As a result, the Defendants conspired to damage the victim's property.

2. Joint principal offenders committed by Defendants 1, 2, and 3

피고인들은 2014. 4. 6. 00:05 위 소속대 의무반 생활관에서 피해자 공소외 3(20세)이 대답을 잘 못한다는 이유로 화가 나 피고인 3은 3포대 생활관 쪽으로 망을 보고, 피고인 2는 피해자의 팔을 잡고, 피고인 1은 발로 피해자의 복부를 6회 찼다.

Accordingly, the defendants jointly committed violence against the victim habitually.

3. Joint principal offenders committed by Defendants 1, 2, and 4

Defendants are the stage officers of the victim Nonindicted 3 (the victim Nonindicted 3) who belong to the victim, and Defendant 2 is the division commander of the above medical unit.

The Defendants indicated in Section 2. Paragraph 2 of the annexed Table of Crimes, on the ground that the victim was absent in the military base and that the answer cannot be made promptly in the above-mentioned medical team life group, and Defendant 1 2 and Defendant 4 pointed out the victim's self-fashion when the victim's self-fashion flows, thereby properly emphasizing his attitude. Defendant 1 prevented the victim from diving until the next day, and Defendant 2 and Defendant 4 supervised the victim as to whether the victim was diving.

As a result, the Defendants conspired to exercise their authority, and Defendant 2 abused the authority of the division commander, thereby committing a harsh act against the victim four times in total.

4. Joint principal offenders by Defendant 1, Defendant 3, and Defendant 4

A. On March 8, 2014, the Defendants: (a) on the grounds that Nonindicted 3 (year 20) was not immediately able to answer the answer, Defendant 1 was 4 times the victim’s chest part of the chest; (b) Defendant 3 4 times the victim’s breast part of the chest due to drinking; (c) Defendant 3 4,5 times the victim’s knife with the victim’s hand floor on one occasion; and (d) Defendant 4 2 times the victim’s knife with the victim’s hand, and twice the victim’s chest. After that, Defendant 1 3 times the victim’s slife with the victim’s slife at the victim’s head; and (d) when the victim’s body was flifeed, the victim’s body was flick, and the victim was flick.

Accordingly, the defendants jointly committed violence against the victim habitually.

B. On April 5, 2014, at around 09:20, the Defendants moved the victim into the above medical warehouse on the ground that the victim Nonindicted Party 3 (the age of 20) did not properly answer the horses asked by the victim Nonindicted Party 3 (the age of 20) in the above medical warehouse, and Defendant 4 reported the network outside the above medical warehouse, and Defendant 1 reported the victim’s remote area five times, and Defendant 3 sent the victim’s buckbucks to the victim four times.

Accordingly, the defendants jointly committed violence against the victim habitually.

다. 피고인들은 2014. 4. 6. 07:50경 위 소속대 의무반 생활관에서 피해자 공소외 3(20세)이 뜀걸음 중 뒤쳐졌다는 이유로 피고인 1은 손바닥으로 피해자의 뺨을 2, 3회 때리고, 피고인 3도 손바닥으로 피해자의 뺨을 2, 3회 때리고, 피고인 4는 피해자에게 엎드려뻗쳐를 지시한 후 발과 무릎으로 피해자의 배와 옆구리 부위를 약 20회 때렸다.

Accordingly, the defendants jointly committed violence against the victim habitually.

5. Joint criminal conduct by Defendants 1 and 3

On March 2014, at first 20:00, the Defendants expressed that Nonindicted 3 (20 years of age) was unable to answer questions equally, and that the Defendants were able to take the victim into the medical warehouse and take the victim back to the medical warehouse.

At the same time, the Defendants were in custody of the victim in the above-mentioned medical warehouse, and Defendant 3 reported the network in front of the medical warehouse door to Defendant 4, and 4 and 5 times off the victim's buckbucks with maus (1m in length) that is dangerous things that Defendant 1 said to bring about to Defendant 4, and Defendant 3 also entered the medical warehouse, and Defendant 1 got the victim into the medical warehouse, and collected 52cm (52m in length) from the victim at five times.

As a result, Defendants conspired to commit violence against the victim by carrying dangerous objects.

6. Joint criminal conduct by Defendants 1 and 4

At around 20:00 on March 27, 2014, the Defendants intentionally cut the bridge from the above-mentioned medical team to the victim Nonindicted 3 (the victim Nonindicted 20 years of age) without responding to it, and Defendant 1 took place two hours from the above-mentioned date to 22:00 on February 27, 2014, Defendant 1 was 15 to 20 hours from the above-mentioned date, 5 to 8 times from the victim’s chest, 5 to 8 times from the victim’s chest, 15 to 20 times from the victim’s chest, and 5 to 8 times from the victim’s buck.

Accordingly, the defendants jointly committed violence against the victim habitually.

7. Defendant 1

(a) Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act;

1) At around 13:00 on January 17, 2014, the Defendant pointed out that Defendant 6’s work was carried out in the medical team’s life room, and assaulted Defendant 4 (20) who is Defendant 6, Defendant 6, “Defendant 6 is promptly managed,” and the victim’s head was blurged one time with bombs.

2) On January 31, 2014, the Defendant: (a) expressed a defect that Defendant 6 was faced with Defendant 4 (20 years of age) at a living room of the medical team at night on the morning; (b) made it to the victim that “in her country is fluorily mixed with Defendant 6; and (c) assaulted Defendant 6 on March 3 through April 4, 201 due to the outbreak of battle that “in her country is fluorily mixed with Defendant 6.

3) On February 26, 2014, around 08:00, the Defendant used the victim’s 6 (20 years of age) and Nonindicted 3, who did not report the Defendant on the part of Defendant 4 (20 years of age) on the part of the victim, who was seated on the part of the emergency base of the headquarters, and used the victim’s 4 (20 years of age) on the part of the victim’s satisfy, and assaulted Defendant 4 on the part of the victim’s 1.

4) The Defendant, on February 27, 2014, proposed to Nonindicted 3 on the daylights of time on February 27, 2014.

When Non-Indicted 3 was unable to open a list well, and Non-Indicted 3 was mixed with Non-Indicted 3, Defendant 6 (the 20-year old-age-old-age-old-age-based-age-based-child-child-child-child-child-child-child-child-child-child-child-child-child-child-child-child-child-child-child-child-child-child-child

5) On March 8, 2014, at around 18:00, the Defendant committed assault against the victim 27 times, as described in the attached Table 3. A list of crimes, on the ground that the victim Nonindicted 3 (20 years of age) was unable to respond properly to the question, on the hand floor, on the ground that the victim Nonindicted 3 (20 years of age) was unable to respond properly to the question.

Accordingly, the defendant habitually committed violence to the victims.

(b) Cruel exercise of power;

1) Cruel acts of exercising power against Defendant 6 (20 years of age)

A) On December 2013, 2013, the Defendant, on the ground that the victim was unable to ice and sound the horses, caused the victim to drink a fluorous part of the fluor in the entrance of the victim by using the fluorous method to put the fluor in the fluor, thereby committing a cruel act by force against the victim.

B) At the end of December 2013, the Defendant committed a harsh act by force against the victim by allowing the victim to be placed on the ground that the victim’s voice was written and the answer was not made in the above-mentioned medical team life group, and by receiving water from the 1.5 literum disease and to be placed in the victim, and by using a tsheshesheshesheshesheshes on the face of the face.

2) Cruelly exercising power against the victim Nonindicted 3 (20 years of age)

A) Around 18:00 on March 29, 2014, the Defendant continued to run a horse with the victim from around 18:00 to 20:30, on the ground that the victim cannot immediately answer the answer, and the Defendant committed a harsh act by force by the victim’s use of force over 11 times as stated in Table 3.b of Attached Crimes List 3.

B) At around 14:00 on March 10, 2014, the Defendant called “I am blicker’s blicker’s life room that “I am blicker’s blicker’s flicker’s blicker’s blicker’s blicker’s blicker’s blicker’s blicker’s blicker’s blicker’s blicker’s blicker’s blicker’s blicker’s blicker’s blicker’s blicker’s blicker’s blicker’s blicker’s blicker’s blicker’s blicker’s blicker’s blicker’s 3 times in 20 minutes.”

피고인은 관물대에서 나온 피해자가 또다시 다른 곳을 쳐다보자 “개처럼 기어봐라.”라고 말하여 의무반 침상위에서 엎드려 기어 다니게 하고, “멍멍 짖어봐라.”라고 하여 “멍멍”이라고 소리 내게 하였으며, “내가 이렇게 짖어봐 하니까 네가 멍멍하지 않냐? 대화는 이렇게 하는 거다. 개처럼 먹어봐.”라고 말하며 침상에 과자를 던져 피해자가 떨어긴 과자를 입으로 주워 먹게 하는 등 위력을 행사하여 가혹행위를 하였다.

(c) Violation of the Medical Service Act;

At around 14:00 on April 6, 2014, although the Defendant was not a medical personnel who is a driver of a large-scale vehicle under his/her control, he/she laid off a large amount of injection to Nonindicted 3 once from the medical team belonging to his/her medical team.

Accordingly, the defendant was not a medical person but a medical person.

(d) coercion;

1) On April 6, 2014, the Defendant: (a) around 12:30 on April 6, 2014, the Defendant, without any particular reason, directed the victim Nonindicted 3 (the 20-year-old age), Nonindicted 3 (the 20-year-old age), “I am spacker spacker spacker? am spacker spacker spacker?” The Defendant, as indicated in paragraph (2) of the same Article, was involved in assault against the victim and cruel acts from March 8, 2014 to April 6, 2014; (b) 4 to six times spacker, and had the victim do a non-obligatory act.

2) On April 6, 2014, the Defendant: (a) around 16:20, on the ground that the victim Nonindicted 3 (the age of 20) was unable to her mind, and (b) took place as indicated in the foregoing paragraph 2. From March 8, 2014 to April 6, 2014, the Defendant her frighted the victim, who was frighted due to assault against the victim and cruel acts, and had the victim fright up to 15 times, and caused the victim to do a non-obligatory act.

3) On March 1, 2014, the Defendant talked about the medical team members and religions in the medical team members belonging to the above medical team on the day’s day and night on March 1, 2014, the Defendant stated that the victim Nonindicted 3 (20) was a reader, and that, “Defendant 2 was unable to show the snow of the appointment before the towing. We do not want to open the church. We do not want to end the church. We do not want to end the church. We do not want to stop the church. The victim said that the victim would be at the end of the week at the time of the church.” The victim said that the victim would not attend the church on March 2, 2014, because the victim did not attend the church until April 7, 2014, when the victim died.”

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the victim's exercise of right to participate in religious activities by intimidation.

(e) Indecent acts by soldiers;

At around 10:00 on April 6, 2014, the Defendant, in collusion with the victim Nonindicted 3 (year 20) in his/her hand, committed an indecent act against the victim, who was a soldier, by forcing the victim, who was a soldier, to voluntarily fright his/her sexual organ, from March 8, 2014 to April 6, 2014, which occurred as stated in the above paragraph (2).

(f) intimidation;

1) In order to prevent the occurrence of violence and cruel acts committed by the Defendant from the beginning of March 2014 due to Nonindicted 3 (20 years of age), the Defendant: (a) on March 3, 2014, when the victim raised a grievance in a medical team belonging to the above police officers, he/she had the victim’s father’s father’s business deceased and his/her mother said her mother would be sold to the island.

2) From the beginning of March 2014, the Defendant committed several assaults and cruel acts against Nonindicted 3 several times, and thereby, Nonindicted 3 died on April 7, 2014.

From March 8, 2014 to March 9, 2014, when the victim non-indicted 1 (the victim non-indicted 1 (the victim non-indicted 20 years of age) was killed in a medical team in a astronomical manner, and from March 29, 2014 to April 6, 2014, Non-indicted 3, the same rank of Non-indicted 3, who was the same, was a victim of several times of assault and cruel acts against the defendant, and was tried to witness on April 6, 2014.

Around April 6, 2014, the Defendant threatened the victim of the above assault and cruel acts to the effect that he did not have observed the criminal facts by stating that “Nonindicted Party 1 did not have observed the Defendant’s criminal facts” in the above-mentioned medical team life group around April 6, 2014, because the victim was aware of this fact.

Accordingly, the defendant threatened the victim.

(g) Violation of the Act on the Punishment of Arrangement of Commercial Sex Acts;

On March 23, 2014, the Defendant: (a) around 00:0 on March 23, 2014, at the place of the night-gu in Seongdong-gu, Sungwon-do; (b) the Defendant: (c) provided female employees in the name-free place of the night-gu; and (d) provided sexual intercourse with 170,000 won.

(h) Magion;

From the beginning of March 2014, the Defendant assaulted Non-Indicted 3 (20 years of age) of the victim from the beginning of March 2014 with large galle (1m in length).

피고인은 위와 같은 잦은 폭행으로 피해자의 반항을 어렵게 한 상태에서 2014. 4.초 14:00경 경기도 연천군 전곡읍에 있는 □□□ 사격장에서 피해자와 엠뷸런스 뒤에 동승 하여, 피해자가 동문서답하는 것을 질책하면서 “너 계속 그렇게 하면 너 카드로 내가 다 사 먹을 거다. 내가 너 카드 압수할거다. 카드 내놔라.”라고 말하여 겁을 주었다.

The Defendant, as such, was issued with a patriotism card owned by the victim around 19:00 on the same day from the victim who frightened the victim and frightened the victim.

8. Defendant 2

(a) Violence against Defendant 6;

On January 1, 2014, at around 18:00, the Defendant committed assault against the victim at the time of five times, on the floor of the victim, on the ground that Defendant 6 (20) was aware of the fact that he was unable to speak and that he respondeded to the same document.

B. Violence against the victim Nonindicted 3

On March 29, 2014, at around 16:00, the Defendant committed assault to the victim four times as indicated in attached Table 4. Paragraph 4 of the List of Crimes, including that the victim Nonindicted 3 (the victim Nonindicted 3 (the victim was 20 years of age) was tightly 4,5 times, on the ground that the Defendant respondeded to the document at the living room of the above medical team.

C. Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (Assaults against groups, deadly weapons, etc.) against the victim Nonindicted 3

At around 08:30 on April 6, 2014, the Defendant was assaulted by the medical warehouse on the ground that the victim Nonindicted 3 (the age of 20) was unable to give answers from Defendant 1, 4, and Defendant 3 at the above medical team’s living room, and the victim was able to take three times the face of the victim on the floor of hand for the same reason that the victim went back to the medical team’s living room, and she was able to take four times the victim’s chest, she was able to take four times the victim’s clothes from drinking, and she attempted to take four times the victim’s clothes from drinking, and she was attempted to leave the victim on the part of the dangerous object (five km). However, Defendant 6, who was next to the above, was attempted to speak.

(d) coercion;

On April 6, 2014, at around 09:00, the Defendant had the victim Nonindicted 3 (the victim Nonindicted 20 years of age) take five times repeatedly on the ground that the victim’s non-indicted 3 (the victim 20 years of age) responded to the relevant document without much voice, and had the victim fright to take five times repeatedly due to the continuous assault and cruel act before the immediately preceding time.

(e) Violation of the Act on the Punishment of Arrangement of Commercial Sex Acts;

On March 23, 2014, the Defendant: (a) around 00:0 on March 23, 2014, at the place of the night-gu in Seongdong-gu, Sungwon-do; (b) the Defendant: (c) provided female employees in the name-free place of the night-gu; and (d) provided sexual intercourse with 170,000 won.

9. Defendant 3

A. On March 7, 2014, the Defendant assaulted the victim’s chest on five occasions on the ground that the victim Nonindicted 3 (years 20) laid down in a living room of the medical team belonging to the above o’clock on the ground that the victim 3 (years 20) turned out the secret relief in the arms.

B. On March 22, 2014, the Defendant pointed out that Defendant 6 (20 years of age) went to the end of the horse in a meeting of the medical team belonging to the upper end of the time. However, even after being pointed out, the Defendant assaulted Defendant 6 of her chest on three occasions when the victim continues to flow to the end of the horse.

C. On March 23, 2014, the Defendant: (a) pointed out that Defendant 6 (20 years of age) was coming back at a medical team living together with the upper end of the horse on the day immediately before the end; (b) assaulted the chest three times by drinking the horses.

D. On March 24, 2014, the Defendant assaulted the victim Defendant 6 (20 years of age) on several occasions in the medical life group belonging to the above department, who continued to flow the end of the horse without any change even in the cadastral records, on three occasions, at the end of the horse.

E. On March 3, 2014, at around 19:00 on March 3, 2014, the Defendant committed assault to the victim on six occasions, including that the victim Nonindicted 3 (the victim Nonindicted 20 years of age) was satisfing and raising the horses, on the floor of hand, on the ground that the victim Nonindicted 3 (the victim Nonindicted 20 years of age) was satisfing and raising the horses.

10. Defendant 4

A. On January 30, 2014, the Defendant: (a) on January 30, 2014, the Defendant: (b) held the victim Defendant 6 (20 years of age) at the medical care center of the above medical care team; (c) held that the victim’s answer does not constitute a major interest in the response; and (d) assaulted the victim’s attending lecture once due to the outbreak of a battle.

B. At around 10:00 on March 22, 2014, the Defendant assaulted Nonindicted 3 (20 years of age) the victim’s face on one occasion with the hand of the defective water that the victim did not properly fix the front part of the carter and cut off today, while having the victim Nonindicted 3 (20 years of age) put the beer beer.

C. On March 23, 2014, the Defendant committed assault to the victim four times, as indicated in attached Table 6. Paragraph 6. of the List of Offenses Act, where the victim Nonindicted 3 (20 years of age) committed a buckbbbbbbbbbs for the reason that the victim’s non-indicted 3 (20 years of age) was deprived of fighting.

11. Defendant 5

(a) Abandonment of duties;

The Defendant is a medical support officer of the duty force of the duty force team of the headquarters of the Seoul Special Self-Governing Province, the Do governor of the Dong-gu in Seoul Special Metropolitan City, and is in charge of the duty to guide and supervise the father in order to prevent any occurrence of the military life of the subordinate subordinate soldiers, such as beating, verbal abuse, and other harsh acts.

On March 18, 2014, the Defendant confirmed that Nonindicted 3’s officers, who were soldiers belonging to the above medical team, was assaulted by Defendant 4, at least 10 times from Defendant 1’s sergeant on March 15, 2014, and that Nonindicted 3’s buckbucks, who cut off the bridge and walk around the same day, had the bucks. In addition, around March 18, 2014, the Defendant heard the fact that Nonindicted 3’s officers, who were soldiers belonging to the above medical team, were trainedd with the above medical team at the night of the day before the day to the day to the day to the day to which the above medical team was appointed by Nonindicted 3, who was a soldier, at the above medical team.

In such cases, as a medical support officer, he/she has taken appropriate measures such as investigating the cruel acts of soldiers who have violated the details of the assault and ice regulations, identifying the fact of damage, and preventing additional violence and cruel acts, and reporting to the commander on the facts of assault and cruel acts.

Nevertheless, the Defendant did not take any measures to prevent assault.

Accordingly, the defendant has deserted his duties without justifiable reasons.

(b) Abandonment of duties;

The defendant, as a medical support officer of the duty group of the Do governor, the Do governor, the Do governor, the Do governor, and the Do governor, is a person in charge of the duty to immediately report to the commander when an accident occurs, such as the duty to guide and supervise the father, the duty to guide and supervise the father and the Do governor, verbal abuse, and other harsh acts.

On April 6, 2014, at around 16:40, the Defendant was sent to the hospital by Nonindicted 3 due to the assault committed by Defendant 1, Defendant 2, Defendant 3, and Defendant 4, and was sent to the hospital by phone.

In such cases, as a medical support officer, he/she should have taken appropriate measures, such as immediately reporting the above fact to the commander, but the defendant did not take any measures.

Accordingly, the defendant has deserted his duties without justifiable reasons.

(c) Violence;

1) At around 17:00 as of March 2014, the Defendant: (a) taken the responsibility of the victim Nonindicted 3 (the victim Nonindicted 20 years of age) on the ground that he was aware of the fact that the victim Nonindicted 3 (the victim Nonindicted 20 years of age) was unable to speak, and (b) committed assault against the victim on the hand floor by 2 and 3 occasions.

2) On April 4, 2014, around 14:00, the Defendant committed assault against the victim on one occasion by taking the head of the victim, who was using a bruth loudspeaker on the ground that the victim Nonindicted 3 was shotly involved in his behavior at the large-scale ward located in the Seocheon-gun, Gyeonggi-do ( Address 1 omitted).

(d) A assault and embankment;

Around March 26, 2014, Defendant 3 assisted and abetted Defendant 3 by facilitating the crime by failing to take any measures against Defendant 3 on the part of Defendant 3, on the ground that Defendant 3 did not follow the victim’s instructions, etc., at around 19:30 on March 26, 2014, Defendant 3 did not take any measures against the victim’s left shoulder at two times with the victim’s hand, on the part of the victim’s hand, on the part of the medical support officer for the medical unit to which Nonindicted 3 (year 20) belongs, and was in a position to restrain assault between the victim and report it to the commander.

(e) Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act;

On April 4, 2014, at around 22:00, the Defendant heard from Defendant 1 to Defendant 3 (20 years of age) that it is too difficult for the victim Nonindicted Party 3 (the age of 20), and ordered the victim to write and shot he was using the shot bopis, which is a dangerous object on the books, and turned the head of the victim who was using the shot bopis into a shot stand.

Accordingly, the defendant carried dangerous objects and assaulted the victim.

(f) Violation of the Punishment of Arrangement of Commercial Sex Acts, etc. Act;

On March 23, 2014, the Defendant: (a) around 00:0 on March 23, 2014, at the place of the night-gu in Seongdong-gu, Sungwon-do; (b) the Defendant: (c) provided female employees in the name-free place of the night-gu; and (d) provided sexual intercourse with 170,000 won.

12. Defendant 6

(a) Violence;

At around 13:00 on April 5, 2014, the Defendant committed three assaults on the part of the victim’s breast part of his chest, on the ground that the victim Nonindicted Party 3 (the age of 20) was wrong in his living room for the above medical team.

(b) Destruction;

Defendant 1, Defendant 2, Defendant 4, and Defendant 3, who lives in the same medical team living in the same medical team, can be examined as a case in which Nonindicted 3 might be killed by assaulting Nonindicted 3, with the knowledge that they could have been killed. In order to eliminate evidence unfavorable to Defendant 1, Defendant 2, Defendant 4, and Defendant 3.

On April 7, 2014, at around 08:00, the Defendant: (a) discarded 50 pages A4; (b) 50, 2 yellow mining in which Defendant 1 had the name of Nonindicted Party 3; and (c) thrown away straw string in a separate collection book in the process of assaulting Nonindicted Party 3, which is a evidence of the fact that Defendant 1 forced the crythm in the above affiliated medical unit, and (d) thrown away 20 parts of A4 form, in which Defendant 1 had the half of which he received from the late death.

Accordingly, the defendant destroyed evidence on the criminal case of others.

each fact in the judgment other than habituality of the judgment,

The facts of No. 1-A of the ruling

1. Each statement made by Defendant 1, Defendant 2 (part), Defendant 3, and Defendant 4 in compliance with the aforementioned provisions at court;

1. Statement made by Nonindicted Party 1 in compliance with this Court

1. The statement made by Nonindicted Party 2 in the third protocol of the trial that fit the witness;

1. Each statement made by the military prosecutor on the suspect examination of Defendants 1, 2, 3, and 4, which conforms thereto;

1. Each statement made by the military prosecutor with respect to Nonindicted 1 and Nonindicted 6, which conforms to the statement written by the military prosecutor

1. Each statement made with respect to Nonindicted 4 and Nonindicted 7 prepared by the prosecution investigator, which conforms to the respective statement statement prepared by the prosecution investigator

1. Statement prepared by a military judicial police officer in compliance with each of the examination records for suspects against Defendants 1, 2, 3, and 4;

1. Each statement made with respect to Nonindicted 8, Nonindicted 1, and Nonindicted 9 prepared by the military judicial police officer, which conforms to the respective protocol of statement

1. Each statement made by Nonindicted 1, Nonindicted 8, Nonindicted 10, Nonindicted 4, Nonindicted 11, Nonindicted 12, Nonindicted 9, Nonindicted 6, Nonindicted 7, Defendant 1, Defendant 2, Defendant 3, and Defendant 4, which conforms to the respective statements.

1. Protocol of verification prepared by a military judicial police officer, protocol of examination of evidence, field inspection, examination plan for inspection of evidence, table table, field map of accident, and examination of body phenomena suitable therefor;

1. On-site verification photographs, on-site verification CDs, visual photographs, and images fit for them from among the scientific investigation institutes (departments of law) of the Ministry of National Defense;

1. 의사 공소외 13이 작성한 사망진단서(공소외 3), ◎◎군 보건의료원장이 작성한 의무기록사본증명서, 국군◁◁병원장이 작성한 의무기록사본증명서, △△△△△병원장이 작성한 의무기록사본발행증명서, 부검의 공소외 2가 작성한 감정서, 국립과학수사연구원 법의관 공소외 14가 작성한 감정촉탁의뢰회보의 판시 사망의 사실 및 사인에 들어맞는 각 기재

Comprehensively

Each fact of section 1-B, 12-B of the holding

1. Each statement made by Defendant 1, Defendant 2, Defendant 3, and Defendant 4 in compliance with this Court;

1. Statement made by Nonindicted Party 1 in compliance with this Court

1. Each statement made by the military prosecutor with respect to the defendants 1, 2, 4, 3, and 6 in the protocol of statement prepared by the military prosecutor;

1. Each statement prepared by a military judicial police officer to be suitable for the examination of suspects against Defendants 1, 2, 4, 3, and 6;

1. Statement made in compliance with the statement of Nonindicted 34 prepared by the prosecution investigator;

1. A statement prepared by Nonindicted 8, which is relevant to the statement

1. Existing and written statements fit for Non-Indicted 3's joints

Comprehensively

Facts No. 2 of the ruling

1. Each statement made by Defendants 1, 2, and 3 in compliance with this Court;

1. Statement made by Nonindicted Party 1 in compliance with this Court

1. Each statement made by the military prosecutor which conforms to the interrogation protocol of Defendants 1, 2, and 3 prepared by the military prosecutor;

1. Each statement made by the military prosecutor with regard to the defendants 1, 2, 3, and 1 in the protocol of statement prepared by the military prosecutor;

1. Statement prepared by a military judicial police officer in compliance with each of the interrogation records of Defendants 1, 2, and 3 prepared by him;

1. Statement prepared by the military judicial police officer on Nonindicted 1's statement, which is consistent with this;

1. A statement prepared by Nonindicted Party 1, which is relevant to the statement

Comprehensively

Each fact set forth in the judgment No. 3

1. Each statement made by Defendants 1, 2, and 4 in compliance with this Court;

1. Statement made by Nonindicted Party 1 in compliance with this Court

1. Each statement made by the military prosecutor which conforms to the interrogation protocol of Defendants 1, 2, and 4 prepared by the military prosecutor;

1. Each statement made by the military prosecutor on the part of the respective statements made against Defendant 1, Defendant 2, Defendant 4, Nonindicted 1, and Defendant 6, which conforms to this;

1. Each statement made by the military judicial police officers on the interrogation of suspects of Defendants 1, 2, and 4, which fit for such statements;

1. Statement prepared by the military judicial police officer on Nonindicted 1's statement, which is consistent with this;

1. A statement prepared by Nonindicted Party 1, which is relevant to the statement

Comprehensively

Each fact of the judgment No. 4

1. Each statement made by Defendants 1, 3, and 4 in compliance with this Court;

1. Each statement made by Nonindicted Party 1 in compliance with this Court

1. Each statement made by the military prosecutor which conforms to the interrogation protocol of Defendants 1, 3, and 4 prepared by the military prosecutor;

1. Each statement prepared by the military prosecutor with respect to the defendant 1, 3, 4, 1, and 15, which conforms to the protocol of statement prepared by the military prosecutor

1. Statement prepared by a military judicial police officer in compliance with each of the interrogation records of Defendants 1, 3, and 4;

1. Statement prepared by the military judicial police officer on Nonindicted 1's statement, which is consistent with this;

1. A statement prepared by Nonindicted Party 1, Defendant 1, Defendant 3, and Defendant 4, which is relevant to the statement

Comprehensively

The facts of the judgment No. 5

1. Each statement made by Defendants 1 and 3 to the extent that the statement was made by them in this Act;

1. A statement made by Defendant 4 in compliance with this Court by the witness;

1. Statement prepared by the military prosecutor as to each protocol of examination of Defendants 1 and 3, which is suitable for such protocol;

1. Each statement made by the military prosecutor with regard to the defendants 1, 3, and 4 in the protocol of statement prepared by the military prosecutor;

1. Statement prepared by a military judicial police officer on each interrogation protocol of Defendants 1 and 3, which fit for such protocol;

1. Statement to the effect that he/she seizes Mamanmanman as stated in the judgment among the protocol of seizure prepared by a military judicial police officer from Nonindicted 16;

1. The image suitable for the on-site inspection of evidence taken of a prone shotule (Investigation records 876-878 pages) of such a photograph;

Comprehensively

Facts No. 6 of the ruling

1. Each statement made by Defendant 1 and Defendant 4 in compliance with this Court;

1. Each statement prepared by the military prosecutor concerning Defendants 1 and 4, which conforms to the interrogation protocol of Defendants 1 and 4;

1. Each statement made by the military prosecutor on Defendant 1, Defendant 4, and Nonindicted 1, which fit for such statement;

1. Statement prepared by a military judicial police officer on the interrogation of Defendants 1 and 4, which is suitable for such statement;

1. Statement prepared by the military judicial police officer on Nonindicted 1's statement, which is consistent with this;

1. A statement prepared by Nonindicted Party 1, which is relevant to the statement

Comprehensively

Each fact set forth in the judgment No. 7

1. A part of the statement made by Defendant 1 in compliance with this Court;

1. Each statement made by Nonindicted Party 1, Defendant 2, and Defendant 3 in compliance with this Court.

1. Statements made by Nonindicted Party 17 in the second trial records, which fit the witness’s statement;

1. Statement prepared by the military prosecutor on the suspect examination of Defendant 1, which is suitable for such statement;

1. Each statement made by the military prosecutor on the part of the defendant 1, the defendant 2, the defendant 3, the defendant 4, the defendant 6, the defendant 5, the non-indicted 15, and the non-indicted 18, which fit for this.

1. Each statement in the statement prepared by the military judicial police officer against Defendant 1, Defendant 2, Defendant 3, Defendant 4, Defendant 5, and Defendant 6, which conforms to the statement;

1. Each statement written by the military judicial police officer on Nonindicted 17, Nonindicted 19, Nonindicted 20, Nonindicted 1, Nonindicted 21, and Defendant 5, which conforms to this among the written statements prepared by the military judicial police officer

1. Each statement made by Nonindicted 1, Nonindicted 20, Nonindicted 22, Nonindicted 21, Defendant 5, Nonindicted 17, Nonindicted 23, Nonindicted 24, Defendant 1, and Defendant 6, which is fit therefor.

1. The image suitable for the photograph (in an investigation record, 622 pages) of a mobile phone in which the mobile account of Defendant 5 was recorded;

Comprehensively

Each fact of No. 8 is subject to

1. A statement made by Defendant 2 in compliance with this Court;

1. Each statement made by Nonindicted 1, Defendant 3, and Defendant 4 in compliance with this Court.

1. Statement prepared by the military prosecutor on the suspect examination of Defendant 2, which is suitable for such statement;

1. Each statement made by the military prosecutor on the defendant 1, the defendant 2, the defendant 3, the defendant 4, the defendant 6, and the non-indicted 15, which conforms to this among the written statements prepared by the military prosecutor

1. Statement prepared by a military judicial police officer on the interrogation of suspects about Defendants 2 and 6, which conforms to the statements;

1. Statement prepared by the military judicial police officer on Nonindicted 1's statement, which is consistent with this;

1. Each statement prepared by Nonindicted 25, Nonindicted 26, Nonindicted 17, Defendant 1, and Defendant 6, which fit the statement

1. A statement made in compliance with the chief appointment (Defendant 2);

1. The image suitable for the photograph (in an investigation record, 622 pages) of a mobile phone in which the mobile account of Defendant 5 was recorded;

Comprehensively

Each fact of the judgment No. 9

1. A statement made by Defendant 3 in compliance with this Court;

1. Each statement made by Nonindicted Party 1, Defendant 2, and Defendant 6 in compliance with this Court.

1. Statements made by Nonindicted Party 17 in the second trial records, which fit the witness’s statement;

1. Statement prepared by the military prosecutor on the suspect examination of Defendant 3, which is suitable for such statement;

1. Each statement made by the military prosecutor on the defendant 1, the defendant 2, the defendant 3, the defendant 4, the defendant 6, and the non-indicted 15, which conforms to this among the written statements prepared by the military prosecutor

1. Statement prepared by a military judicial police officer on each interrogation protocol of Defendants 3 and 6, which fit for such protocol;

1. Each statement made with respect to Nonindicted 17 and Nonindicted 1 prepared by the military judicial police officer, which conforms to the statement;

1. Each statement prepared by Nonindicted 26, Nonindicted 27, Nonindicted 24, Nonindicted 17, Defendant 1, and Defendant 6, which fit the respective statements

Comprehensively

Each fact of No. 10

1. A statement made by Defendant 4 in compliance with this Court;

1. Each statement made by the witness, Nonindicted 1, Defendant 1, Defendant 2, Defendant 3, and Defendant 6 in compliance with this Court.

1. Statements made by Nonindicted Party 17 in the second trial records, which fit the witness’s statement;

1. Statement prepared by the military prosecutor on the suspect examination of Defendant 4, which is suitable for such statement;

1. Each statement made by the military prosecutor on the defendant 1, the defendant 2, the defendant 3, the defendant 4, the defendant 6, and the non-indicted 15, which conforms to this among the written statements prepared by the military prosecutor

1. Statement made in compliance with the statement of Nonindicted 28 prepared by the prosecution investigator;

1. Statement prepared by a military judicial police officer on each interrogation protocol of Defendants 4 and 6, which fit for such protocol;

1. Each statement made with respect to Nonindicted 17, Nonindicted 1, and Nonindicted 19 prepared by the military judicial police officer, which conforms to the respective statements made by the military judicial police officer

1. Each statement made by Nonindicted 26, Nonindicted 29, and Nonindicted 17, which fit the respective statements

Comprehensively

The facts of No. 11 are

1. A partial statement made by Defendant 5 in compliance with this Court;

1. Each statement made by the witness, Nonindicted 1, Defendant 4, Defendant 2, and Defendant 3 in compliance with this Court.

1. Statements made by Nonindicted Party 17 in the second trial records, which fit the witness’s statement;

1. Statement prepared by the military prosecutor on the suspect examination of Defendant 5, which is suitable for such statement;

1. Each statement made by the military prosecutor on the defendant 1, the defendant 2, the defendant 3, the defendant 4, the defendant 6, and the non-indicted 15, which conforms to this among the written statements prepared by the military prosecutor

1. Statement prepared by a military judicial police officer on each interrogation protocol of Defendants 5 and 6, which fit for such protocol;

1. Each statement written by the military judicial police officer on Nonindicted 20, Nonindicted 8, Nonindicted 17, Nonindicted 30, and Nonindicted 31, which conforms to the written statement prepared by the military judicial police officer

1. Each statement prepared by Nonindicted 17, Nonindicted 20, Nonindicted 30, Defendant 1, and Defendant 6, which fit the statement

1. Statement to the effect that he seizes standards for book keeping as indicated in the judgment among the protocol of seizure prepared by a military judicial police officer from Nonindicted 16;

1. Each statement in compliance with the personnel order, and the first aid personnel training plan for the entire part part of the first aid personnel training plan;

1. Each image suitable therefor, of a photograph (ae.g., 622 pages) taken of a mobile phone in which the mobile account of Defendant 5 was expressed, and of evidence verification photographs (a.g., investigation record 887-889 pages) taken of a stand for a shoulder;

Comprehensively

The facts of No. 12 of the ruling

1. A statement made by Defendant 6 in compliance with this Court;

1. A statement made by Defendant 1 in compliance with this Court by the witness;

1. Each statement made by the military prosecutor on the defendants 6 and 1, which fit for such statement;

1. Statement prepared by the military prosecutor on the suspect examination of Defendant 6, which is suitable for such statement;

1. Statement prepared by a military judicial police officer on the suspect examination of Defendant 6, which conforms to the protocol;

Comprehensively

each of them may be recognized.

The facts as to the defendant 1's habitualness

Defendant 1 may be recognized in light of the fact that Defendant 1 repeatedly committed the same kind of instant crimes within a short period of not more than 3 months, such as committing assault through a similar method on about 36 occasions from January 2014 to April 6, 2014, as stated in paragraphs (2), (4), (6), and (7) of the same facts constituting the crime. Accordingly, each of the facts in the holding is proven.

1. Article relevant to the facts constituting an offense and the selection of punishment;

A. Defendant 1: Articles 259(1) and 30 of the Criminal Act; Articles 2(1)1 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act; Article 2(1)1 of the Criminal Act; Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act; Articles 3(1) and 2(1)1 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act; Articles 260(1) and 30 of the Criminal Act; Articles 366 and 30 of the Criminal Act; Articles 366 and 30 (a) of the Criminal Act; Articles 62(2) of the Military Criminal Act; Articles 87(1)2 of the Medical Service Act; Articles 27(1)1 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act; Articles 324(1)1 of the Criminal Act; Articles 3(1) and 260(1)1 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act; Articles 92-3(1) and (3) of the Criminal Act; Articles 13(1) through (3) of the Criminal Act; Articles 13) through (1) of the Criminal Act.

B. Defendant 2: Articles 259(1) and 30(1) of the Criminal Act; Articles 2(2) and (1)1 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act; Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act; Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act; Article 30 of the Criminal Act; Article 366 of the Criminal Act; Article 366 of the Criminal Act; Article 30 of the Criminal Act; Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act; Articles 6, 260(1) and 260(1)1 of the Criminal Act; Article 260(1) of the Punishment of Violence, etc. Act; Article 324 of the Criminal Act; Article 21(1) of the Act on the Punishment of Acts of Arranging, etc.; Article 324 of the Criminal Act; Article 21(1) of the Act on the Punishment of Acts of Arranging, Etc.; Article 324 of the Act on the Punishment of Sale of Commercial Sex Acts, Etc.

(c) Defendant 3: Articles 259(1) and 30(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 2(2) and (1)1 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of joint assault, the choice of imprisonment), Articles 3(1) and 2(1)1 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, Articles 260(1) and 30 of the Criminal Act, Articles 366 and 30 of the Criminal Act, Articles 366 and 30 of the Criminal Act (the point of assault by carrying a deadly weapon), Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act (the choice of imprisonment, etc.) of the Criminal Act

(d) Defendant 4: Articles 259(1) and 30 of the Criminal Act; Article 62(2) of the Military Criminal Act; Article 30 of the Criminal Act; Articles 2(2) and 2(1)1 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act; Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of joint assault, choice of imprisonment), Articles 366 and 30 of the Criminal Act (the point of destruction and damage of property; the choice of imprisonment); Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of assault and the selection of imprisonment); Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of assault and the selection of imprisonment)

E. Defendant 5: Article 122 of each Criminal Code (the point of abandonment of duty, the choice of imprisonment), Article 260 (1) of each Criminal Code (the point of assault, the choice of imprisonment), Articles 260 (1) and 32 (1) of the Criminal Code (the point of aiding and abetting violence, the choice of imprisonment), Articles 3 (1) and 2 (1) 1 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Code, Article 260 (1) of the Punishment of Acts of Violence, etc., Article 21 (1) of the Act on the Punishment of Acts of Arranging Sexual Traffic (the point of sexual traffic and the choice of imprisonment)

F. Defendant 6: Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of assault, the choice of imprisonment), Article 155(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of destroying evidence and the choice of imprisonment)

2. Aggravation of concurrent crimes;

(a) Defendant 1: the former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act. Article 50 (Aggravation of Concurrent Crimes against Death or Injury, which is the most serious punishment)

(b) Defendant 2: the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act. Article 50 (Aggravation of Concurrent Crimes against Death or Injury, which is the most serious punishment)

(c) Defendant 3: the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act. Article 50 (Aggravation of Concurrent Crimes against Death or Injury, which is the most serious punishment)

(d) Defendant 4: the former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act. Article 50 (Aggravation of Concurrent Crimes against Death or Injury, which is the most serious punishment)

(e) Defendant 5: the aggravated punishment for concurrent crimes resulting from the violation of the former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act (within the scope of the sum of the long-term punishments of each crime above)

(f) Defendant 6: former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act / [Aggravation of concurrent crimes against destruction of evidence, which is heavier than punishment (to the extent that the long-term punishment of the above two crimes is added up)]

3. Suspension of execution;

Defendant 6: Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (i.e., a first offender and has yet to be older and his mistake has been pened in depth)

1. Defendants 1, 2, 3, and 4

피고인 1, 피고인 2, 피고인 3, 피고인 4는 2014. 4. 6. 16:07경부터 16:32경까지 약 25분간 피해자 공소외 3의 얼굴과 옆구리, 배부위, 허벅지, 가슴부위에 대하여 수 십 차례 폭행하여서 결국 피해자 공소외 3을 사망에 이르게 하였다. 피고인 1은 2014. 3. 초부터 범죄사실 제2항 이하에 기재되어 있는 바와 같이 수시로 피해자 공소외 3을 때리고 가혹한 행위를 하였고, 피고인 2, 피고인 3, 피고인 4 역시 피고인 1 보다 그 횟수가 적을 수 있으나 피해자 공소외 3에 대한 폭행과 가혹행위를 약 한 달간 지속적으로 해왔다. 부검의의 감정서의 기재에 의하면 피해자 공소외 3의 코끝, 윗입술, 우측 전두부 및 두정부, 좌측 옆구리, 등, 양측 아래팔 바깥쪽, 양측 대퇴, 정강이, 종아리 부위에 멍이 발견되고 있다는 점이 인정되고 검시사진을 보면 피해자 공소외 3의 시신에 거의 전신에 해당하는 위 부분에 멍이 들어있음을 확인할 수 있어서 피해자 공소외 3이 받았던 폭행 및 가혹행위가 얼마 가혹한 것이었는 지를 알 수 있다. 목격자들은 피해자 공소외 3이 2014. 3. 중순경부터 다리를 절고 다녔다고 하고 있으며 피고인들도 피해자 공소외 3이 다리를 저는 등 자신의 폭행 및 가혹행위로 말미암아 고통 받고 있다는 것을 알면서도 2014. 4. 6.까지 폭행 및 가혹행위를 지속하였다. 피고인들은 피해자 공소외 3이 입대하고 훈련소를 마친지 얼마 되지 않은 신병임에도 불구하고 피해자 공소외 3의 업무상 실수나 군인기본자세 등을 이유로 폭행을 가하였고, 2014. 4. 6. 피해자 공소외 3을 사망에 이르게 했을 때도 피해자 공소외 3이 말대답이 늦다거나 음식을 먹을 때 쩝쩝 소리를 낸다거나 젓가락질을 잘못하였다는 등의 사유로 피해자 공소외 3에게 무자비한 폭행을 가한 점을 볼 때 피고인들은 피해자 공소외 3에게 일을 가르쳐주려는 목적보다는 단지 마음에 들지 않아서 괴롭히려는 목적으로 폭행과 가혹행위를 가한 것으로 보인다. 피고인들이 피해자 공소외 3을 폭행 및 가혹행위 하는 강도 및 횟수는 점점 심해져서 피해자 공소외 3이 사망하기 8일 전인 2014. 3. 29.부터는 매일 기마자세를 시키고, 2014. 4. 1.부터는 밤에 기마자세를 시키고 잠을 못 자게 감시를 했으며, 2014. 4. 5.부터는 식사도 제대로 하지 못하게 하는 등 그 수법이 점점 잔인해졌고 그럼에도 피고인들은 자신들이 피해자 공소외 3을 폭행하고 괴롭힌다는 것에 별다른 죄책감을 갖고 있지 않았다고 보여진다.

Although the intent of murder is not acknowledged to the Defendants, it is evident that the death of the victim Nonindicted 3 was due to the cruel assault of the Defendants. The victim Nonindicted 3, merely entered the military forces late than the Defendants, allowed the assault of the Defendants, and allowed the harassment until the time of death by failing to escape from the appointment who lives together with 24 hours. It is against the fact that the instant case is the most stimulent case among the crimes that may occur in the military.

The Defendants make a statement to the effect that their crimes are divided in the court. However, when considering the following facts, the above Defendants were written by Nonindicted 3 and went to a hospital, they were asked to see that they were used due to their assault and to use freezing food, Nonindicted 1 also told that they would be urged to commit their own crimes, and that their crimes are likely to be committed, and that they would be likely to be committed, it cannot be doubtful of the authenticity of the crime. In light of the above Defendants’ criminal acts immediately after the crime, such as the following facts: (a) the victim Nonindicted 3 was used, and (b) the victim Nonindicted 3’s possession related to the crime, and (c) the victim Nonindicted 3’s possession related to the crime, were concealed, and (d) the victim Nonindicted 3’s murder was sleeped and reflected, and thus, (e) the victim Nonindicted 3 might not be found.

특히 피고인 1은 별지 범죄알람표 1.항 기재와 같이 피해자 공소외 3이 사망할 당시 피해자에 대한 폭행의 정도와 횟수에 있어 다른 피고인들에 비해 가장 잔인하였고 수차례 폭행을 당하다 견디지 못한 피해자 공소외 3이 오줌을 싸고 쓰러지는 것을 보고도 꾀병을 부린다며 발로 피해자 공소외 3의 가슴부위를 발로 차는 등 무자비하였으며 2014. 3. 초부터 범죄사실에 나와 있는 사실만으로 보아도 피해자 공소외 3에게 거의 매일, 하루에 여러 번 폭행 및 가혹행위를 반복해 온 사실이 인정되어 범죄사실에 기재되어 있는 폭행 및 가혹행위 외에도 밝혀지지 않은 지속적인 폭행 및 가혹행위가 더 있을 것으로 보여 피고인들 중에서 가장 잔혹하게 피해자 공소외 3을 괴롭혀왔음을 알 수 있다. 또한 피해자 공소외 3이 자신을 신고하지 못하게 협박하였고 피해자 공소외 3에게 치약을 먹이고 가래침을 뱉어서 핥아 먹게 하는 등 일일이다 열거하지 못할 정도로 그 행위가 잔혹하고 엽기적이며 이러한 행위를 계속 반복하였다는 점에서 그 죄질이 극히 불량하다. 심지어 피고인 1보다 후임인 다른 피고인들에게 피해자 공소외 3을 폭행 및 가혹행위를 하도록 유도한 사실도 있어서 피고인 1은 피해자 공소외 3이 폭행 및 가혹행위를 견디다 못해 사망하게 된 이 사건 범죄에 있어서 가장 주도적인 역할을 수행하였다.

Although Defendant 2 is in the position of the division commander who directs the division unit and takes and recommends the difficulties of the members of the division, Defendant 2, rather than actively participates in the violence of Nonindicted 3, etc., he does not seem to have been able to repent his wrongs, such as, in spite of the responsibility attributable to the victim Nonindicted 3, he did not appear in the court, that he wanted to show his intention to the Defendant 1, who is the same bottled first of the month he did not appear in the mind that he did not want to show his responsibility to the Defendant 1.

Defendant 3 and Defendant 4, as indicated in Article 2.1 of the Criminal Act even before the victim’s death by his own assault and assault, took place without awareness of any crime. Defendant 3 and Defendant 4 state that Defendant 1 led the victim Nonindicted 3 and took part in his passive part in the crime. However, as described in paragraphs (9) and (10) of the criminal facts, Defendant 1 may recognize the fact that Defendant 3 committed the victim Nonindicted 3 even on March 17 through 25, 2013, and these Defendant also actively participated in the victim Nonindicted 3. Nevertheless, Defendant 3 and Defendant 4 appear to be responsible for the crime, and there is doubt as to whether the above Defendants committed the crime against Defendant 1 and Defendant 4 have a strong mind about the crime.

On the other hand, the above defendants are primary offenders who have no criminal power at all, and most criminal facts from the investigative agency are recognized and led to confessions, and the fact that they appear in the last statement that they are divided about their mistakes should be considered as favorable circumstances to the defendants.

However, considering the above facts, the crime of the above defendants against the victim non-indicted 3 was extremely poor, the result of the cruel assault infringed on the victim non-indicted 3's life, which is a impossible value as a substitute for the military. Accordingly, the family member who lost children who did not have been able to carry out the national defense duty in the military was unable to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be able to be sentenced to severe punishment for the above defendants.

As can be seen, the sentencing conditions indicated in the argument of the instant case, namely, the gravity of legal interests infringed upon by the instant crime, the incompetence of motive, and the circumstances after the commission of the crime, etc. shall be comprehensively considered and determined as per Disposition.

2. Defendant 5

Defendant 5 is a person who is in a position to prevent and eradicate such act by taking appropriate measures, such as managing a medical team as a medical support officer, and investigating and reporting to the commander in the event of any sacrifies, verbal abuse, and other harsh acts committed by the medical team. However, from March to March, the Defendant did not take any measures despite having been aware of the fact that Nonindicted 3 was assaulted by other military personnel from the victim Nonindicted 4, etc., and rather, Defendant 1, etc., did an act difficult to understand as an executive officer, such as: (a) training the victim Nonindicted 3 and giving a divorce; and (b) subsequently, Defendant 1, 2, Defendant 3, and Defendant 4 committed several assaults to Defendant 1, etc.; and (c) expressed the victim’s face of assault to Defendant 1, etc., thereby allowing Defendant 1, etc. to assault the victim Nonindicted 3.

Then, Defendant 5’s aiding and abetting Defendant 1, Defendant 2, Defendant 3, and Defendant 4 to cope with assault and cruel acts against Nonindicted 3 of the victim, thereby preventing the result of the extreme group of the victim’s death caused by continuous assault and cruel acts if he had been able to do so and aiding and abetting such act without preventing it from doing so is a numerical act that may not be seen as a military executive officer, and it is a serious crime that may undermine the military trust and causes a great social concern.

Although Defendant 5 is the primary offender, most of the facts of the crime are recognized and led to confessions, and the fact that it appears to be divided about his mistake in the last statement at the latest, the circumstances favorable to the defendant should be considered. However, considering this point, even if considering this point, the victim Nonindicted 3 was neglected to commit an act that must not be absolutely considered as an executive officer, and the victim’s assault and cruel act was eventually causing death, which eventually led to the death of the deceased non-indicted 3. Accordingly, the bereaved family who lost children who did not have fulfilled the duty of national defense in the military was not completely used from the victim Nonindicted 3’s bereaved family, and rather, the surviving family does not want to punish the defendant at all, and rather, considering the importance of the responsibility imposed on the executive officer at the rank within the military team, it is inevitable to determine the order of punishment as the order of punishment as above.

3. Defendant 6

Defendant 6 attempted to eliminate the relevant evidence in order to conceal the crime of assault and cruel acts against the victim Nonindicted 3 by assaulting the victim Nonindicted 3, and by Defendant 1, Defendant 2, Defendant 3, and Defendant 4.

However, Defendant 6 also became subject to violence and cruel acts by Defendant 1, etc. before the victim was mistaken due to the latter part of Nonindicted 3, and committed an assault like the crime, Defendant 1, who had previously exercised the violence to himself, could not have been able to respond to it. In the case of destruction of evidence, Defendant 6 did not act with the intention of destruction of evidence from the beginning, but attempted the appointed soldiers to remove any unfavorable evidence from the beginning, and thus, the degree of his participation in a series of crimes is minor. In addition, in consideration of the fact that the victim was the first offender, all of the confessions made by the investigative agency and the criminal acts are divided, and the age is yet, the punishment shall be determined as per the order.

1. The crime of murder committed by Defendants 1, 2, 3, and 4

A. Summary of the facts charged

From March 8, 2014, the Defendants: (a) removed the victim Nonindicted 3 from the outside in the military opening event; (b) removed the victim from the outside; and (c) committed assault against the victim and cruel acts from March 8, 2014, as stated in the facts constituting the crime No. 2. The Defendants knew that the victim was unable to take the surface from April 5, 2014; (c) failed to take meals; and (d) caused by the assault, the Defendants knew that the victim was in a physical form, such as clothes, chests, bucks, and bucks, and that the victim’s health condition is not good.

그럼에도 피고인들은 2014. 4. 6. 16:07경 경기도 연천군 (주소 1 생략)에 있는 소속대 의무반 생활관에서 피해자와 함께 냉동식품을 먹던 중 피해자가 음식을 쩝쩝거리고 먹으며 질문에 대답이 늦는다는 등의 이유로 별지 범죄일람표 1.항 기재와 같이 피해자에게 폭행을 가하였다. 그러던 중 16:32경 피해자가 눈을 감고 쓰러지며 피해자가 살려달라고 하는 등 계속되는 폭행에 의하여 피해자가 사망할 것을 예견하면시도 별지 범죄일람표 1.항 기재와 같이 피고인 2, 피고인 4는 망을 보고, 피고인 3은 피해자가 물을 마시지 못한다는 이유로 손바닥으로 피해자의 머리를 3회 때리고 그 후 피고인 1은 피해자가 오줌을 싸며 정신을 잃었음에도 꾀병부리지 말라고 하며 발로 피해자의 가슴부위를 1회 걷어찼다. 이로 인해 피고인들은 피해자로 하여금 2014. 4. 7. 16:20경 경기도 의정부시 (주소 2 생략)에 있는 ○○○대학교 △△△△△병원에서 과다출혈에 의한 속발성 쇼크 및 좌멸증후군 등으로 사망하게 하였다. 이로써 피고인들은 공모하여 피해자를 살해하였다.

B. Determination

1) The Defendants asserted that the military prosecutor assaulted the victim against the part prosecuted for murder and caused death, but did not intend to kill the victim and did not do so.

2) Relevant legal principles

The intent of murder in the crime of murder does not necessarily require the intention of murder or planned murder. It is sufficient to recognize or anticipate the possibility or risk of causing the death of another person due to one's own act, and its awareness or prediction is not only conclusive but also it is so-called dolusent intent. In the case where the defendant asserts that there was no criminal intent of murder at the time of the crime, and that there was only the criminal intent of murder or assault, the issue of whether the defendant was guilty of murder at the time of the crime shall be determined by taking into account the objective circumstances after the crime, such as the background leading up to the crime, motive, type and method of the crime, the occurrence of the prepared deadly weapon, the degree of the occurrence of the crime, the possibility of the occurrence of the consequence of the crime, and the existence of the act of avoiding the result after the crime (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2006Do734, Apr. 14, 206; 200Do310, Aug. 23, 2008).

Accordingly, in determining whether the Defendants had failed to commit the commission of murder, the Defendants’ objective circumstances after the commission of the crime should be comprehensively considered, such as the background leading up to the commission of the crime, motive for the crime, existence, type, and method of the prepared deadly weapons, the subsidiary and repetition of the attack, the potential of the occurrence of the consequence of the death, and the existence of the act of avoiding the consequences after the crime.

3) 이 법원이 적법하게 채택하여 조사한 증거들 중 피고인들이 이 법정에서 한 진술, 증인 공소외 1이 이 법정에서 한 진술, 공소외 4, 피고인 3, 공소외 6, 공소외 7의 각 진술서의 각 기재, 의사 공소외 13이 작성한 사망진단서의 기재, ◎◎군 보건의료원장이 작성한 의무기록사본증명서, 국군◁◁병원장이 작성한 의무기록사본증명서, △△△△△병원장이 작성한 의무기록사본발행증명서 등의 각 기재에 의하면, 2014. 4. 6. 사건 당일 오전부터 피해자의 사망시까지 다음과 같은 사실이 인정된다.

① 피고인 1은 02:00경 선임병들을 무시하는 태도를 보인다는 이유로 피해자 공소외 3에게 02:00부터 05:00까지 잠을 자지 않을 것을 지시하였다. ② 피고인 1은 7:30경 의무반에서 피해자가 전날 밤에 잠을 자지 말라고 한 피고인의 지시를 어기고 잤다는 이유로 손바닥으로 피해자의 뺨을 3회 때리고 발로 피해자의 허벅지를 3-4회 걷어차 폭행하였다. ③ 피고인 1, 피고인 3, 피고인 4는 07:50경 위 소속대 의무반 생활관에서 피해자가 뜀걸음 중 뒤쳐졌다는 이유로 피고인 1은 손바닥으로 피해자의 뺨을 2, 3회 때렸고, 피고인 3도 손바닥으로 피해자의 뺨을 2, 3회 때렸으며, 피고인 4는 피해자에게 엎드려뻗쳐를 지시한 후 발과 무릎으로 피해자의 배와 옆구리 부위를 약 20회 때렸다. ④ 피고인 2는 9:00경 생활관에서 피해자가 목소리를 크게 하지 않고 동문서답한다는 이유로 피해자에게 기마자세를 1분씩 5회 반복하여 취하도록 하였다. ⑤ 피고인 1은 10:00경 피해자가 대답을 잘 못하고 무시하는 것 같다는 이유로 생활관 바닥에 가래침을 뱉어 피해자에게 핥아먹도록 하였다. 피고인 3은 피해자의 가슴에 멍이 있다는 것을 발견하고 피고인 1에게 이 사실을 말하였다. 피고인 1은 “큰일 났으면 벌써 큰일 났다”라고 말하면서 멍이든 피해자의 가슴에 안티푸라민을 발라주다가 피해자가 거슬리는 말을 했다는 이유로 피해자의 손에 안티푸라민을 짠 뒤 피해자로 하여금 스스로 바지를 내려 성기를 노출시킨 후 성기에 안티푸라민을 바르도록 하였다. ⑥ 피고인 1은 10:30경 의무반에서 피해자가 묻는 말에 대답을 잘 하지 못하자 3m 정도 떨어진 곳에서 테니스 공을 피해자를 향해 4회 던져 폭행하였다. ⑦ 피고인 2는 10:30경 피해자가 피고인 1로부터 지적을 받았다는 이유로 화가 나 슬리퍼를 2회 집어 던져 피해자의 가슴과 어깨를 맞춰서 폭행하였다. ⑧ 피고인 1은 12:30경 위 소속대 의무반 생활관에서 별다른 이유 없이 피해자에게 “야이 씨발새끼야! 너랑 나랑 나이 차이가 얼마인데 말을 그딴식으로 하냐?”라고 말하며 피해자에게 앉았다 일어서기를 4~6회 시켰다. ⑨ 피고인 1은 14:00경 위 소속대 의무반 생활관에서 피해자에게 1회에 걸쳐 수액 주사를 놓아주었다. ⑩ 15:58경 피고인 3과 피고인 4가 PX에서 냉동식품 등을 사서 전자렌지에 데운 다음 의무실로 복귀하였다. ⑪ 16:05경 피고인 1, 피고인 2, 피고인 3, 피고인 4는 피해자 공소외 3과 함께 냉동식품을 먹기 시작하였다. ⑫ 16:07경부터 16:32경까지 별지 범죄일람표 1.항과 같이 피고인 1, 피고인 2, 피고인 3, 피고인 4가 피해자를 번갈아 가면서 폭행하였고 돌아가면서 망을 봤다. 폭행 과정 중인 16:15경 피고인 1은 피해자 입에서 떨어진 음식물을 피해자가 핥아먹도록 하였고, 16:20경 피해자에게 앉았다 일어서기를 약 15회 시켰다. ⑬ 16:32경 피해자는 오줌을 싸면서 쓰러졌고 피고인 1은 “꾀병을 부리지 마라”는 식으로 이야기를 하면서 쓰러진 피해자의 가슴부위를 걷어차 피해자가 관물대 있는 곳까지 넘어지게 하였다. 피고인 2와 피고인 4가 피해자를 부축해서 일으켜 세울 때 피해자가 옹알이하고 신음소리를 냈는데 피고인 1이 다시 “꾀병을 부리지 마라”고 하면서 피해자를 다시 차려고 하자 피고인 3이 이를 제지하였다. 피고인 3이 피고인 1을 말렸을 때 피고인 1의 표정이 놀라는 표정이었다. 피해자의 상태가 이상하자 피고인 4가 산소포화도 측정기를 가져왔고 피고인 3이 피해자의 검지에 끼워 측정하였다. 피고인 3이 피해자의 산소와 맥박이 떨어지고 있다고 말을 하였다. 피해자의 턱이 갑자기 굳어지자 피고인 1이 그 턱을 열려고 했는데 잘 되지 않아 피고인 4에게 턱을 열라고 하였고, 피고인 2가 피해자의 입에 기도유지 통을 넣었다. ⑭ 16:40경 피고인 3이 피해자의 심장이 멈춘 것을 보고 피고인 2와 피고인 3이 심폐소생술을 하였다. 피고인 1이 AED 이야기를 했지만 피고인 2는 AED 하면 더 심각해 질 수도 있다는 이야기를 해서 그냥 심폐소생술을 하였는데 피고인 3은 피해자의 상태가 좋지않아 병원에 가야겠다고 말하였다. 그러자 피고인 4가 피해자를 들어서 구급차까지 옮겼고 피고인 1이 구급차 뒷문을 열었고 피고인 4가 피해자를 들것에 실었다. ⑮ 16:42경 피고인 1이 지휘통제실에 헉헉거리면서 뛰어들어가 그 당시 지휘통제실에서 근무를 서고 있던 공소외 4에게 “태풍, 환자 발생했는데 지금 숨을 안 쉽니다”라고 하였다. 피고인 1이 피해자를 실은 구급차를 운전 해서 16:44경 위병소를 통과 했고, 피고인 2와 피고인 3이 구급차 안에서 번갈아가면서 심폐소생술을 하여 ◎◎의료원에 피해자를 옮겼다. 구급차에서 피해자의 입에서 토사물이 밖으로 떨어졌다. 피고인 2와 피고인 3이 심폐소생술을 하면서 울고 있었고, 피고인 2가 피해자를 바라보며 “야, 일어나 일어나 라고 시발”, “야, 시발색기야 일어나”라고 말했다. 16:48경 피해자를 태운 구급차가 ◎◎의료원에 도착하였다. 피고인들은 피해자가 쓰러진 경위를 최초 설명할 때 냉동식품을 먹던 도중 호흡이 가빠지다가 배뇨하면서 쓰러졌다고 하였다. 17:15경 피해자의 맥박 및 호흡이 돌아왔다. 2014. 4. 7. 16:20경 피해자가 사망하였다.

4) The motive leading the Defendants to commit the crime

피고인들이 이 법정에서 한 진술, 증인 공소외 1이 이 법정에서 한 진술에 의하면 피고인들은 2014. 4. 6. 16:05경 피해자와 함께 냉동식품을 먹고 있다가 16:07경부터 피고인 1은 피해자가 음식물을 쩝쩝대고 먹는다는 이유로 피해자를 폭행한 사실, 이후 피고인 1, 피고인 2, 피고인 3은 젓가락질을 못한다. 대답을 빨리 하라, 대답을 똑바로 하라, 피해자의 동작이 느리다, 피해자가 반말을 하지 말라고 했는데 반말을 한다고 말하며 피해자를 폭행한 사실, 피고인 4는 피고인 1이 지시를 내리자 피해자를 폭행한 사실, 피고인 1은 피해자가 그 전날 피고인 1의 아버지가 젊었을 적 깡패였다는 이야기를 꺼냈다는 이유를 말하면서 폭행한 사실이 인정된다. 그러나 범죄사실 제2.항 이하에서 인정되듯이 2014. 3. 8.부터 피고인들은 이와 유사한 이유들로 피해자를 폭행하여 왔으므로 위 인정사실 만으로 2014. 4. 6. 16:07경에 시작된 폭행의 경우에만 피고인들이 특별히 살인의 고의를 가지고 피해자를 폭행하였다는 정황을 인정하기 어렵고 그 밖에 살인의 동기가 될 만한 증거를 찾아볼 수 없다.

(v) the existence, type, and usage of prepared deadly weapons;

As above, the Defendants did not use any lethal weapon when they assault the victim. In the case of Defendants 1 and 4, the Defendants committed an assault against the victim by using Maulos, which is a dangerous object prior to the crime No. 5, and the place of crime was the place where the Defendants live. Therefore, if the Defendants had the intent to kill the victim, there was sufficient possibility that the Defendants would in advance prepare the deadly weapons or use the deadly weapons or dangerous objects in the vicinity. Nevertheless, the Defendants did not assault the victim with the deadly weapons or dangerous objects. In light of the above, it is difficult to immediately reverse the Defendants’ intent of murder in the act of assaulting the victim by hand and her.

6) The extent of the nature and repetition of the attack, and the possibility of the occurrence of the death

A) Whether the material part of the body is the price

As stated in attached Table 1. Paragraph 1. of the List of Offenses, the Defendants committed assault on the part of the victim's face or head with the main floor of the victim's face or head, and the part of the ship and the part of the dunes were sent to the victim. As such, at the time of committing the crime, the Defendants examined whether the result of death occurred after suffering from a fatal satis on the face or head's face, the part of the ship and the part of the dunes.

In light of the statement of Non-Indicted 2's results of autopsy on the body of Non-Indicted 2 and the statement made by Non-Indicted 2 in the third trial records, the body of Non-Indicted 2 shall be examined on the right side side and the two governments for the victim's two parts, however, the body of Non-Indicted 2 shall not be observed on the two parts, and it shall be medically difficult to see that the blood transfusion from the two parts alone was caused by the skin's death. According to the above appraisal statement, the body of Non-Indicted 2's blood transfusion is not observed on the upper part of the upper right side of the body, and the body of Non-Indicted 2 shall not be observed on the upper part of the body of Non-Indicted 2's body, and it shall not be presumed that the body of Non-Indicted 3's body was destroyed by ethromatic or galone, etc., and it shall not be presumed that the body of Non-Indicted 2's body was destroyed by ethromatic damage and its outer bones (No. 12).

Therefore, even if the Defendants, at the time, engaged in assaulting the face and the head part of the body with the main floor of drinking or hand several times, it is difficult to recognize the Defendants as a fatal price for the important parts such as brain or organs. There is no other evidence to deem that the Defendants, with the intent to murder at the time of committing the crime, sold the important parts of the body to the degree of death.

B) The repetition of the attack

On September 2, 2014, the military prosecutor changed the victim's private death into the inner shock and the anti-exploitive shock. According to the statement of the response to the request for appraisal prepared by Non-Party 14 of the Law of the National Science Investigation Agency, the victim's private person can consider the possibility of inner shock by a wide range of multi-closion, and the victim's private person can take into account the judgment of autopsy and the first medical treatment in light of the fact that the non-exploitation and the first medical treatment were carried out, and there is also the possibility that the reverse shock and the absorption of the above contents caused by a long-term physical and mental cruel act were a combined cause of death, and there is sufficient possibility that it might be hard to conclude that it had a relatively strong impact on the human body, such as a chest, a light, and an anti-exploitation.

However, from around March 8, 2014 to around 2014, the Defendants: from around 6, 2014, she abused the victim’s chest, fucks, bucks, and bucks, and assaulted the victim’s hair, bucks, and bucks. After around 16:07 as stated in attached Table 1., the Defendants assaulted the victim’s head, fright, and frights on several occasions. According to each statement of the statement on Nonindicted 24, Nonindicted 23, and Nonindicted 5, Nonindicted 18, and Defendant 3, etc., it is difficult to view that there was an excessive shock from around 6: 100 to 4:6 of the victim’s bucks from around 6:3, 2014 to 10 of the victim’s bucks, and that there was an excessive shock from around 10:0 of the victim’s 10 of the Defendant’s 3 and Defendant 1, etc.

C) Possibility of the occurrence of death

According to the expert report prepared by the autopsy, it is recognized that the body of the victim at the time of autopsy was in a state of 166 cm in height and nutritional condition. According to the witness Nonindicted 1’s testimony, the victim was dead on April 6, 200, but the victim was blickly or hidden. The Defendants consistently asserted that the victim was not blickly and blickly killed, and the Defendants did not assault the victim before the investigation agency, and the Defendants used the previous crime No. 2(hereinafter referred to as “the crime of this case”), and thus, they did not use a deadly weapon, etc., and used it to flickly cause death of an adult male victim and used it to flickly cause death of an important body part of the body, and thus, it is difficult to recognize that the Defendants were blickly aware of the result of the death of the victim, such as a long-term shock or flicking danger of death of the victim, etc.

다만 피고인들이 이 법정에서 한 진술, 공소외 1이 이 법정에서 한 진술에 의하면 피고인 1은 16:32경 피고인들이 폭행하던 도중 피해자가 오줌을 싸면서 쓰러졌을 때 쓰러진 피해자의 가슴부위를 1회 걷어차 피해자가 관물대 있는 곳까지 넘어진 사실이 인정되는 바, 피해자가 오줌을 싸면서 쓰러졌음에도 1회 걷어찼으므로 피고인 1의 경우 적어도 미필적이나마 피해자가 사망할 것을 인식하면서 폭행을 한 것이 아닌가 하는 의심이 든다. 그러나 피고인 1은 범행당시 피해자가 꾀병을 부리고 있는 것으로 생각했다고 수사기관에서부터 일관되게 주장하고 있고, 피고인들이 이 법정에서 한 진술, 공소외 1이 이 법정에서 한 진술, 공소외 4의 진술조서의 진술기재 등에 의하면 2014. 4. 6. 16:32경 피고인 1이 “꾀병을 부리지 마라”는 식으로 이야기를 하면서 피해자를 찬 점, 이후 한 번 더 차려고 했으나 피고인 3이 사태의 심각성을 말하면서 말리자 이를 그만둔 점, 피해자의 턱이 갑자기 굳어지자 피고인 1이 그 턱을 열려고 한 점, 피고인 2와 피고인 3이 심폐소생술을 하고 있을 때 피고인 1이 AED 이야기를 한 점, 피해자를 구급차까지 옮길 때 피고인 1이 구급차 뒷문을 열어 도와준 점, 16:42경 피고인 1이 지휘통제실에 헉헉거리면서 뛰어들어가 그 당시 지휘통제실에서 근무를 서고 있던 공소외 4에게 “태풍, 환자 발생했는데 지금 숨을 안 쉽니다”라고 말한 점, 피고인 1이 피해자를 실은 구급차를 운전해서 16:44경 위병소를 통과한 점, 피고인 1이 운전한 구급차가 16:48 ◎◎의료원에 도착한 점을 인정할 수 있는 바, 위 인정사실에 비추어 볼 때 피고인 3이 피고인 1에게 피해자의 상태가 심각함을 말하자 피고인 1이 피해자를 살리기 위해 위 사실과 같이 노력한 점도 인정된다. 또한 피고인 3의 진술에 의하면 피고인 1에게 피해자의 상태가 심각함을 말하면서 피고인 1을 말렸을 때 피고인 1의 표정이 놀라는 표정이었다고 하므로 피고인 1이 피해자 상태의 심각성을 알지 못하고 폭행에 나아갔을 가능성도 인정되므로 위 가격 사실만으로 피고인 1이 꾀병을 부리지 말라고 말을 했으나 내심으로는 피해자 상태의 심각성을 알면서도 피해자가 사망할 것이라고 예견하면서 피해자를 폭행하였다는 점을 입증하기에는 부족하다. 그러므로 피고인 1에게 피해자를 살해하려는 확정적 또는 미필적 고의가 있었다는 점이 합리적인 의심의 여지가 없을 정도로 증명되었다고 보기 어렵고, 달리 이를 인정할 증거가 없다.

7) The objective circumstances after the commission of the crime, such as the existence of an act of avoidance after the crime

According to the statements made by the Defendants in this court and the statements made by Nonindicted Party 1 in this court, it can be acknowledged that Defendant 1 was placed on April 14:00 as criminal facts No. 8. c., and Nonindicted Party 1 stated that Nonindicted Party 1 made a statement that, in the sense that it would be possible for the Defendants to suspect whether the Defendants would be subject to harsh treatment. From the perspective of the average person, it is difficult for the Defendants to have a person with intention to commit murder to obtain for the purpose of recovering the health of the victims two hours prior to murder, and there is no evidence to prove that there was another motive to kill Defendant 1 from around 14:00 to around 16:07.

또한 피고인들이 이 법정에서 한 진술, 증인 공소외 1이 이 법정에서 한 진술, 공소외 4, 공소외 11, 공소외 12, 공소외 9, 공소외 6, 공소외 7이 작성한 진술서의 각 기재를 보면, 범행 후 피해자의 상태가 이상하자 피고인들은 산소포화도 측정기를 가져와서 측정하고 피해자의 입에다 기도유지 통을 넣었으며 피해자의 심장이 멈춘 것을 보고 심폐소생술을 하였고 이후 즉시 구급차로 ◎◎의료원까지 피해자를 후송하였으며 구급차 안에서 계속해서 심폐소생술을 한 사실도 인정할 수 있는데 이 부분은 피고인들과 다른 목격자들의 진술이 거의 일치하여 쉽게 배척할 수 없는 사실이다. ◎◎군 보건의료원장, 국군◁◁병원장, △△△△△병원장이 작성한 각 의무기록 사본 등의 각 기재에 의하면 피고인들은 비교적 신속한 시간인 16:48경 피해자를 ◎◎의료원에 옮겨서 응급조치를 한 결과 17:15경에 피해자의 맥박 및 호흡이 돌아와서 회생의 가능성이 엿보인 점도 인정된다.

Therefore, it is difficult to view that the Defendants had the intent to commit murder with respect to the conduct of the Defendants before and after the crime, especially the fact that the Defendants conducted cardiopulmonary resuscitation to avoid the result after the crime (the written statement prepared by Nonparty 4). It is recognized that the Defendants, upon arrival at a medical institution, concealed their assault facts and used freezing food for the victim, provided a mixed treatment for the victim. However, there is no evidence to prove that the Defendants, due to the Defendants’ initial explanation that the victims used freezing food, failed to provide adequate medical treatment to the victim, and eventually died because they did not receive proper treatment for the victim, and it can be recognized that the Defendants used freezing food with their own defense because the Defendants got out of their own assault. Thus, such acts by the Defendants alone do not recognize that the Defendants followed the circumstances after the crime, thereby leading the Defendants to murder).

8) As to the Defendants’ conspiracy to commit murder

As seen earlier, there is no evidence to acknowledge the Defendants’ intentional murder, and thus, the Defendants cannot be deemed to have committed the crime of murder since it cannot be deemed that there was a combination of intent, such as the Defendants’ order to commit murder against the victim or impliedly and, therefore, there is no other evidence to prove it.

C. Conclusion

In light of the fact that the Defendants assaulted the victims over several hundred and twenty-five minutes as shown in the attached Table 1. Paragraph 1., there is a doubt that the Defendants did not have the intention of murdering at least during the commission of the instant crime.

However, as seen earlier, the Defendants consistently denied that there was no intentional murder from the investigation stage. As to the crime of this case No. 2. 2. on the first day of the crime of this case, there is no circumstance to deem that there was a motive for murder as it is not significantly different from the previous one even on the day of the crime of this case. The Defendants did not use a deadly weapon or dangerous object at the time of the crime. According to the appraisal report and written request for appraisal as to the result of autopsy, it is difficult to view that there was no direct damage to the material part of the body, and it is hard to view that there was no other evidence to prove that there was an excessive shock of the victim from the point of view that there was no mental shock from the point of view that there was no other evidence to prove that there was an excessive shock of the victim from the point of view that there was no mental shock from the point of view of the victim’s act, such as chest, light, and survelopical shock, and that there was no other evidence to prove that there was an excessive shock of the victim.

Ultimately, this part of the facts charged constitutes a case where there is no proof of facts constituting a crime, and thus, should be pronounced not guilty pursuant to the latter part of Article 380 of the Military Court Act. However, as long as it is found guilty of a crime resulting in bodily injury which is the ancillary

2. The defendant 5's ancillary charge of a subordinate crime

A. Facts charged

The Defendant is a medical support officer of the duty force of the duty force team of the headquarters of the Seoul Special Self-Governing Province, the Do governor of the Dong-gu in Seoul Special Metropolitan City, and is in charge of the duty to guide and supervise the father in order to prevent any occurrence of the military life of the subordinate subordinate soldiers, such as beating, verbal abuse, and other harsh acts.

On March 18, 2014, the Defendant confirmed on March 18, 2014 that Non-Indicted 3 was assaulted by Non-Indicted 4, who was a soldier belonging to the above medical team, on at least 10 occasions from Defendant 1 of the Cick on March 15, 2014, and on the same day, Non-Indicted 3’s bucks that she was forced to walk.

In such cases, as a medical support officer, he/she should investigate the details of the assault, confirm the damage, and take measures to prevent additional assault and cruel acts, report the fact of assault and cruel acts to the commander, and make all necessary methods for the authenticity of committing crimes jointly with many subordinates.

Nevertheless, Defendant 1, Defendant 2, Defendant 3, and Defendant 4, who were soldiers belonging to the medical team from March 18, 2014 to April 4, 2014, did not know that Nonindicted 3, as described in the No. 11, 12, 14-20, and 4. No. 1, 2, 3-5, 6. No. 2, 3-5, and 6. No. 2, and 3, either knew of the fact that the Defendant committed a joint assault over 16 occasions, or did not take all necessary measures for the petition.

Accordingly, the Defendant, without any justifiable reason, was aware that he committed an assault jointly by the Defendant 1, 2, 3, and 4, who was subordinate to the Defendant, and did not perform all necessary measures for the petition.

B. Determination

Article 93 of the Military Criminal Act provides that “A person who, knowing that he/she commits a crime jointly by multiple fathers, fails to perform any method necessary for filing a petition shall be punished by imprisonment with or without prison labor for not more than three years.” This crime is a kind of the net omission Act punishing a person who, knowing that he/she commits a crime jointly by multiple fathers, does not perform any method necessary for filing a petition despite being aware of the fact that he/she commits a crime jointly by multiple fathers.” The term “petition” means that a person who is superiors to the other fathers or mothers his/her superior

If multiple interpretation is possible or analogical interpretation is possible in criminal laws, it is against the principle of no punishment without the law, which is the basic principle of the rule of law, to guarantee an individual’s freedom and rights from the arbitrary exercise of the state’s penal authority. Therefore, if it is possible to establish this crime even for an offense against which it is impossible to interpret more broadly than a literal interpretation or to fulfill the necessary method for “responding” in the first place, it should be deemed as a violation of the principle of no punishment without the law, because it goes against the principle of clarity excessively unreasonable than the meaning of the language and text. Therefore, the meaning of “a large number of co-ownership” and “any known and known and known methods necessary for its authenticity,” which are generated from the provision, should be interpreted within the possible meaning of the legal provision or language.

According to the statements made by Defendant 5 in this court and the statements made by Defendant 4 in this court, as stated in the above facts charged, Defendant 5 was the victim Nonindicted 3 was assaulted by Defendant 4 from Defendant 1 on March 15, 2014 at least 10 times on the part of the bridge from Defendant 1 on March 15, 2014, and it is recognized that Nonindicted 3’s breathbbbbbbs that the victim 3 left the bridge and walked on the same day.

In the sense that the majority of his father jointly commits a crime, “ multiple” should be two or more persons in accordance with the language and text. Examining the facts charged in itself, Defendant 5 merely knew that Defendant 1 assaulted Nonindicted 3 and did not jointly commit a crime by two or more other fathers.

E. From March 18, 2014 to April 4, 2014, as indicated in the facts charged, Defendant 1, Defendant 2, Defendant 3, and Defendant 4’s act of assaulting Nonindicted 3 individually, 16 times or more such as the No. 11, No. 12, 14-20, No. 1, No. 2, No. 3-5, No. 6 (6) No. 2, and No. 3, and No. 16 of the Attached Table 3. of the Criminal Notice No. 11, No. 11, No. 12, No. 4, No. 1, 2, 3-5, and No. 4. 2, and No. 3 cannot be interpreted as a “joint assault” in which the above Defendants committed an act of assaulting Nonindicted 3, and the victim individually under the language and text, and thus, cannot be punished as a secondary crime under Article 93 of the Military Criminal Act.

In addition, it should be deemed that it is possible to file a petition at the time of recognition of the crimes committed by many subordinates. Considering that “an offense committed by many subordinates” that was recognized at the time of the crime is an interpretation faithful to the language and text thereof. If it is not so, there is room for interpretation as to the crime committed by many subordinates at the time of application of Article 93 of the Military Criminal Act, and it is against the principle of clarity by excessively expanding punishment if it is deemed that the crime similar to that committed by the victim is different. Ultimately, in order to establish the above crime, it is difficult for the victim to have known in advance that many subordinates of the crime were either conspired, conspired, or committed before the commencement of the crime, and that there was no way to prove that there was an assault against Defendant 1 or the victim was an assault against Defendant 5 at the time of application of the aforementioned Article 93. If it is possible for the victim to have known in advance that there was an assault against Defendant 1 or the victim, the victim had already become aware of the fact that it had already been committed against Defendant 5 or the victim.

As above, Defendant 5’s act does not constitute a subordinate crime, and there is no evidence to acknowledge it differently.

C. Conclusion

In the end, this part of the facts charged is hedged when there is no proof of facts constituting a crime, and thus, the acquittal should be pronounced pursuant to the latter part of Article 380 of the Military Court Act. However, as long as the defendant is found guilty of a crime of abandonment of duties under Article 11(a) of the Supreme Court Decision 11 of the same Act, the

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.

[Attachment Offense List omitted]

Associate judge chief of the trial examiner Lee Sung-sung (Presiding Justice)

(1) Defendants 1 and 2, Defendant 3, Defendant 4, Defendant 1, and Defendant 4, who are students in the department of cultural consortiums, in the second year, in the first year of nursing, in the first year of radiation, and in the first year of the first year, in the faculty with no relationship with medical knowledge. Defendant 3 and Defendant 2, even in the case of students in the department related to medical treatment, did not acquire the professional medical knowledge of “the emulgic shock and the emulgic shock by the emulgic emulgic emulgic emulgic emulgic emulgic emulgic emulgic emulgic emulgic emulgic emulgic emulgant.

2) According to the expert report prepared by Nonindicted 2 by the Prosecutor, and the statement written by Nonindicted 2 by Nonindicted 2 in the third mission protocol, the possibility of death of the victim is recognized by the act of assaulting the autopsy as an element causing the climatic color.