logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 전주지방법원 2019.07.15 2019고합53
폭행등
Text

The defendant is innocent. The summary of this judgment shall be notified publicly.

Reasons

1. On June 30, 2018, the Defendant: (a) around 04:00 on June 30, 2018, the charge of the instant case: (b) the Defendant, while drinking and drinking with other customers at the C cafeteria located in Seocho-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Seojin-gu; (c) and (d) the victim E (e.g., 46 years old) who is one of the other customers, was in a dispute; (d) the Defendant was humped to the victim E; (d) the victim E’s cump is tight; (e) the victim E was pushed back once; (e) continued to attract the left arms; (e) the victim D was tight with the victim; and (e) the victim was fumped with the victim; and (e) the victim’s disease, which is a dangerous object on the table bble.

Accordingly, the defendant assaulted the victim E and threatened the victim D by carrying dangerous objects.

2. Summary of the defendant and his defense counsel

A. The Defendant does not have the fact that the victim E has been pushed away once, and has lost his/her left arms.

Even if the victim E had been deprived of her arms by smugglinging the victim E, this constitutes self-defense by not falling under “Assault” in the crime of assault under the Criminal Act, but constitutes self-defense in the course of setting up against the victim E’s assault.

B. The Defendant did not have any intent to harm the victim D, and it is merely an expression of temporary decentralization that the Defendant was suffering from the illness.

3. Determination

A. 1) First of all, the victim E made a statement to the effect that the Defendant had her left arms, and the following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by this court, i.e., the victim E’s statement to the effect that “the Defendant left her arms” was “The Defendant was present in this court as a witness, and stated to the effect that the Defendant was her elbow part of the Defendant’s arms.” The victim E’s statement to the effect that the Defendant was her arms again during the prosecutor’s re-examination process, was reversed.

arrow