logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2018.05.24 2017고합620
폭행
Text

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

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On July 30, 2017, at around 06:00, the Defendant assaulted the victim’s face on the front side of the “D”, which is located in Ischeon-si C, on the ground that the victim E (20 years of age) walked the Defendant’s horse to her female-friendly room and brought his hand to the shoulder.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Statement of witness E in the second public trial protocol;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on internal investigation reports and damaged photographs;

1. Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the facts constituting an offense;

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

1. Determination on the assertion by the Defendant and his defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The gist of the argument is that the Defendant: (a) heard the phrase “the victim was shouldered to G (F’s friendship)” from G; (b) demanded the victim to go to G; and (c) made the victim to go to G; and (d) assaulted the Defendant, such as kneeing the Defendant’s knee price and the Defendant’s face.

The defendant's act constitutes the defense of a political party or the excessive political party defense, since the defendant's act is not only a kind of friendship with the victim's part of the victim's frank with drinking.

2. Where it is reasonable to view that the perpetrator’s act of attacked with one another’s intent to attack the victim’s unfair attack rather than with a view to defending the victim’s unfair attack, and that the perpetrator’s act of attacked with one another and went against it, it cannot be deemed as a legitimate defense or excessive defense, since it has the nature of the act of attack at the same time as the act of attack (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2000Do228, Mar. 28, 2000). It is recognized that the Defendant suffered an injury, such as a dura, etc., due to the victim’s assault.

However, in light of the situation and process of the instant fighting, the Defendant did not fully consider the possibility of exercising violence.

arrow