(영문) 의정부지방법원 고양지원 2018.06.07 2018고단264

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 의정부지방법원 고양지원 2018.06.07 2018고단264

상해

Text

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

An applicant for compensation shall be dismissed.

Reasons

1. On May 20, 2017, the Defendant: (a) around 07:10, and around the Defendant’s house, the wife E in a divorce lawsuit seeking the Defendant’s house, and the victim B (36) who has frighted in the family of the Defendant; (b) frightened the victim’s chest by hand; (c) frighted the victim’s chest; (d) frighted the victim’s neck with arms; and (e) frighted the victim’s face by drinking, the Defendant inflicted injury on the victim, such as brain fright, etc. with no open two wifes requiring treatment for about two weeks.

2. In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court, the evidence alone presented by the prosecutor was inflicted an injury on the victim as stated in the facts charged in the instant case.

It is difficult to see, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

(1) Statements concerning the situation immediately preceding the assault, the method and contents of the assault shall not be consistent as follows:

B In the initial investigation conducted by the police, E took the defendant's door door from the front door to the first floor elevator before the front door of the front door, and 15 times a part of the front door of the front door of the front door, and 30 times a son and the head in the front of the front line.

After that, in the police and the prosecution, the statement about the contents of the assault was changed to the effect that the defendant was taken three to four times on the face of his own, and that he was taken three to four times on the face of his own.

B In this Court, E tried to close the door while the Defendant intending to take a bath before her house, and E intended to enter the door.

The defendant was closed twice, and he was flick.

In addition, when the door is reconvened, E should open a door, which gets into question, and from that time 30 to 40 minutes from the defendant.

유사 판례

-창원지방법원 진주지원 2019.11.21 2019고단367

-수원지방법원 성남지원 2017.09.22 2017고단1077

-인천지방법원 2018.02.13 2017고정2728

-청주지방법원 충주지원 2015.08.13 2015고단117

-인천지방법원 2015.02.13 2014고정3843