logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2017.04.27 2016고정858
모욕
Text

A defendant shall be punished by a fine of 500,000 won.

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

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant is a research institute employee who serves as the secretary-general in the above research institute labor union.

On January 26, 2016, the Defendant, at around 10:00, failed to negotiate labor-management organizations held in the conference room of the research institute located in Daejeon Seo-gu Daejeon-gu, Daejeon, and on the same day at around 11:20 on the same day, it was difficult for the Defendant to find a person in charge of labor of the research institute at the research support office of the said research institute, but the office was in the process of finding the person in charge of labor.

피고 인은 위 과정을 지켜보던 피해자 D이 피고인을 보고 기분 나쁘게 쳐다보았다는 이유로 " 야, D, 눈깔 어 어디 눈을 똑바로 들어, 뭘 쳐다봐, 개새끼야, 눈깔 어 "라고 큰 소리로 말하여, 위 사무실에 근무하던

In addition, among several employees such as E, the above victims were openly insulting.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of witness F;

1. Recording of witness D's statement in the fourth public trial protocol;

1. Partial recording of the witness G in the fourth public trial record;

1. Determination as to the assertion of the Defendant recording part of the witness E in the fourth public trial protocol and his/her defense counsel

1. The alleged defendant did not wish the victim to “nick” and only expressed that the victim saw the victim as her opening.

2. Comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances admitted by the evidence of judgment, the Defendant’s horses, such as “D, snow flag, blag”, etc., are recognized.

Therefore, we cannot accept the above argument of the defendant and his defense counsel.

① A witness E, or witness G, of an organization to which the initial victim had been aware of his or her desire to do so to D, was prepared, and when this court reached this court, the witness G was deemed to have been employed by the Defendant while he or she was “YD” and did not memory.

To the effect that “a statement is submitted to an investigative agency due to the close relationship with D,” the witness E will take one bath against a specific person.

arrow