logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2017.07.21 2016고정1499
폭력행위등처벌에관한법률위반(공동폭행)
Text

Defendants shall be punished by a fine of KRW 300,000.

The Defendants did not pay each of the above fines.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

Defendants are the same team members of the company, and they are not aware of the victim D(24).

Defendant

A around 09:00 on June 2, 2016, around the 6th century, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Daejeon, the National Pension Service: (a) committed an act of assaulting the victim’s upper part of the victim’s upper part of the body once, on the ground that the victim was found to have parked an illegal vehicle by Defendant A; (b) Defendant B committed an act of assaulting the victim’s upper part of the body while the victim and the victim tolded, and thereby, the Defendants assaulted the victim jointly.

Summary of Evidence

1. A legal statement of a witness;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to photographs damaged;

1. Relevant Article 2 (2) 1 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act and Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts: Defendants who choose a penalty: Article 2 of the same Act and Article 260 (2) 1 of the Criminal Act;

1. Defendants to be detained in the workhouse: Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act

1. The Defendants of the provisional payment order: Determination on the Defendants and their defense counsel’ assertion under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The Defendants did not assault the victim as stated in the facts charged of this case.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court, the following circumstances are acknowledged: ① The victim committed assault against himself as stated in the instant facts charged by the Defendants since the investigative agency to this court.

The contents of the statement are relatively specific and detailed, and it does not seem that the victim made a false statement in order to mislead the Defendants. ② Even based on the damaged photograph (Evidence No. 18 pages) taken immediately after the occurrence of the instant case, it is confirmed by the victim himself/herself, and ③ Defendant B only speaks about the dispute between Defendant A and the victim, and there is no assault against the victim. However, according to Defendant A’s investigation agency’s statement, the upper part of the victim part of the victim part is Defendant B.

arrow