logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2014.09.18 2014노633
상해
Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is consistent with the statement of the victim, even if the statement of the defendant is based on the statement of the defendant, it is confirmed that the defendant faced the victim with the will of the victim, the galle, the gallebing of the victim, and the victim's timber and exceeded together. If the photographs of the injured part submitted by the victim are visible, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant of the facts charged is sufficient to find the defendant guilty, but the judgment of the court

2. Around 20:00 on October 1, 201, the Defendant, within the main point of Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, Jongno-gu and the second floor “D”, was aware of the victim E (n't, 49 years of age) who was in a relationship with the previous wife, and was fluenced by one hand, set up the victim's head debt with one hand, cut down the victim's head debt, cut down the victim's body with one hand, and embling the part of the victim's neck, thereby making the victim's neck, requiring approximately three weeks of medical treatment.

3. Determination

A. The judgment of the court below on the facts charged is as follows.

There are statements made by the victim's investigative agency and the court of the court below in accordance with the facts charged, each injury diagnosis report, and the upper part photo.

However, the following circumstances acknowledged by the record are as follows: ① The name of the sick person written in the injury diagnosis report submitted by the victim (hereinafter “the name of the sick person”). “The name of the sick person” was “a scam and tension base and tension base, brain scams and scams, scams, scams, scams, scams, scams, and open scams (e.g. the front part, left part, the left part, and the upper part of the upper part)” and both arms, the left part of the body photographs submitted by the victim, the victim’s scams, and the upper part was inconsistent with the Defendant’s scambling of the victim’s scams, and ② the victim was diagnosed at the hospital for the first time on October 31, 201.”

arrow