logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 2017.10.11 2017노1239
폭행
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. In light of the following circumstances known by evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below on July 12 and July 13, 2016, the summary of the grounds for appeal is that the defendant has sufficiently been aware of the fact that he/she has been her bucked against the victim on two occasions, and therefore, the judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and there is no error of misunderstanding of facts.

Defendant

The argument is without merit.

A. The Defendant was hospitalized in the same sick room as the victim and was receiving treatment, but there was a serious verbal dispute with the victim on July 12, 2016 and July 13, 2016 due to the toilet use.

B. The victim stated in the court of the court below that “the Defendant brought a case at the hospital hospital hospital hospital hospital hospital hospital hospital hospital hospital hospital hospital hospital room No. 504 on July 12, 2016 and July 13, 2016,” and the content of the statement is specific and consistent from the time when the written complaint was submitted.

A witness F also made a statement consistent with the victim's statement in the court of the court below, and the detailed contents are consistent with the victim's statement in the investigation agency, such as the background and form of the assault, the place of the crime, witness, and circumstances after the crime.

(d)

In the process of the examination of the police, the defendant asked whether the victim was her heredm with his/her hand, etc., who was her sick room, and asked whether he/she would be a son. The defendant was her her blick with his/her hand, etc., and such her blick with it.

It was recognized that there was a fact that he was her at the time of a victim’s bucking by making a statement.

E. Although the Defendant denies a crime with “the victim’s her scam not time off,” the Defendant did not have any dissenting evidence except the Defendant’s statement even though it appears that there were several witnesses other than the witness at the time of the crime.

(f)in relation to the defendant of the victim and witness F, crime.

arrow