logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 전주지방법원 정읍지원 2016.03.22 2015고정155
상해
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

At around 14:00 on August 4, 2015, the Defendant driven by the Defendant for the reason that the Defendant was on board the Victim E in front of the Jin Chang-gun, North Chang-gun, a stolen Defendant, and laid down large-scale trees from the Victim E in a non-motor vehicle. When the Defendant displayed approximately 11 minutes of the Victim’s part, left part, parts of the Victim’s neck, and parts of the bones, etc., on the part of the Victim, the Defendant used approximately 1 week of the Victim for the damage of the neck, influe, the string, the string of the wall, the string, the string, the string, the string, the string, the string, the string, and the string of the arms.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each statement of witness E and F;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of partially the police officers of the accused;

1. Statement protocol by the police for E;

1. Medical opinions;

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

1. Article 257 of the Criminal Act applicable to the crime, Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act, the selection of fines, and the selection of fines;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 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 summary of the argument was that the victim was frightened by the Defendant on the part of the Defendant at the time of the instant case, and the victim was frightened to the Defendant at the time of the instant action, and the victim was frightened to the bar, and the victim was frightened to the bar, and the victim was found to have attempted to attack, and immediately suspended the Defendant’s act, which constitutes legitimate defense or excessive defense.

2. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly adopted and examined by this Court, the victim, who was faced with the rear wheels part of the victim who was driven by the defendant, immediately driven the sea-to-face while the victim was driven by the victim, was trying to have the victim's leakage or F on the part of the victim, and the victim tried to have the victim's leakage or F on the part of the vehicle. The victim returned to the escape of the victim and the victim set off the vehicle on the side of the vehicle.

arrow