logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 동부지원 2018.12.12 2018고단1653
폭력행위등처벌에관한법률위반(공동상해)
Text

Defendant

A shall be punished by a fine of 3,00,000 won, by imprisonment of 4 months for each of the defendants B, C, and D.

Defendant

A above.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

A around 22:40 on December 29, 2017, at the entrance of the “Jsing room” located in the Busan Metropolitan City captain-gun I, on the ground that the victim K (55 years) who called the phone came to become the everth one, was pushed down with the wall by having the victim spabned with the wall by hand on the ground that the victim K (55 years) who called the phone was spaced, and the victim was tightly pushed down by hand, and the victim was spaced in several times by hand, and the victim was spaced over the floor of the road.

As a result, the Defendants jointly put about approximately six weeks of medical treatment to the victims, such as the bones of the bones, the left side, and the pelle.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Each police statement made against L, M, K, N, orO;

1. A P statement;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes, such as photographs, diagnosis notes, and recording notes of the victim's injury;

1. Article 2(2)3 of the Act on the Punishment of Violences, etc. for Criminal Offense, Article 2(2)3 of the Punishment of Violences, etc., Article 257(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 257(1) of the Criminal Act, Defendant A’s choice of fines, and the rest of

1. Defendant A to be detained in a workhouse: Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act;

1. Defendants B, C, and D with probation: Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Defendants B, C, and D of the community service order: Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act;

1. Defendant A: The reason for sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act (hereinafter “Criminal Procedure Act”) is as follows: Defendant A and Defendant B, C, and D with intent to impose all responsibility for the instant case after committing the instant crime.

Defendant

A, although the first investigative agency did not memory at all the circumstances at the time of the instant case, it is believed that the Defendants would not make a false statement to himself/herself, and that he/she has any responsibility for himself/herself.

I also made a statement.

Defendant A is responsible for the initiation of the instant case

Even if the Defendants were to observe the attitude of the Defendants after the crime, the circumstances after the crime are not very good.

In addition, the witness was not a number of witnesses.

arrow