logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 순천지원 2018.08.13 2018고정172
폭행
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 700,000.

Where the defendant fails to pay the above fine, one hundred thousand won shall be one day.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant is a person who was an employee of “B” and the victim C ( South, 41 years old) is a person who operates a restaurant of “B”.

On November 7, 2017, 2017, at “B” restaurant located in Gwangju-si D around 09:50 on November 7, 2017, for the reason that the Defendant did not spat down at his/her own direction, the injured party would die and throw away “B” to the Defendant.

“In doing so, the Defendant threatened the Defendant by citing an empty beer who is a dangerous thing, and harming the head of the Defendant.

When the Defendant went out of the damaged restaurant, but the Defendant got away from the Defendant, caused the victim to breath, he saw the breath, and assaulted the victim by breathing the breath of the victim and spathing the breath.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. The protocol of the police statement about C (the employee E who observed the above case was found by the investigative agency to catch and trace each other with the defendant and the victim.

A statement, that the Defendant’s India’s investigative agency carried a balbbbbage from the injured party, and dumped it.

In light of the fact that the victim made a statement and partly recognized the fact that he had set up against the victim, the credibility of the victim’s statement is recognized by the Defendant.

1. Application of investigation reports (on-site CCTVs and confirmation of witnesses)-related Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant Article 260 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense, Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act selection of punishment, and selection of fines;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. The Defendant, on the grounds of sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, committed the instant crime during the period of suspended execution for violent crimes.

Victim's damage has not been recovered.

However, the Defendant committed the instant crime in the course of setting up against the Defendant, who was threatened with intimidation and assault by using dangerous objects first from the damaged person, and in the course of setting up such intimidation and assault, some of the motive and circumstances may be considered.

The defendant shall record other records, such as his/her age, environment, and criminal records.

arrow