2013Gohap122Death, etc. caused by abandonment

New A

Kim Jong-American (prosecution, public trial), and public trial

Law Firm Hawon, Attorney Lee Gyeong-hoon

October 14, 2013

The defendant is innocent.

1. The facts charged in this case

From May 31, 2010 to C, the Defendant was living outside of the second floor of the victim, at the home located in the window of Changwon-si from May 31, 201, the victim was living outside of the second floor of the victim. The victim had a face-to-face-to-face disease in the Changwon Hanwon-si Hospital due to symptoms such as a decline of influence on both sides, a decline of root, and a decline of a remote area, etc., and the victim had a duty to support and protect the victim, such as providing meals to the victim and taking care of his body from time to time, changing the attitude so as to prevent the occurrence of bathing, and maintaining cleanliness around the surrounding areas of the victim, and taking care of the disease of the victim, and taking care of the disease of the victim, the victim was obligated to support and protect the victim, such as providing medical treatment at the hospital.

Nevertheless, from the end of January 2012, the Defendant: (a) brought the room the victim her lives in several days; (b) brought about two weeks prior to the death; and (c) laid the victim her softened; (d) the victim, who had difficulty in drinking, left the room in the inside of the entrance, etc., but did not leave the room; and (e) neglected the victim from the night of February 3, 2012 to February 18:30, 2012 without carrying the room in one time; and (b) caused the victim to die from the blood transfusion caused by taking a bath and taking a bath in the mouth and taking clothes within the victim’s room on February 5, 2012.

2. Determination

가. 유기치사죄는 보호의무 있는 자가 노유(老幼) 질병 · 기타 사정으로 인하여 타인의 조력 없이는 자신의 생명·신체에 대한 위험을 스스로 극복할 수 없는 자, 즉 요부조자를 보호 없는 상태에 둠으로 인하여 사망의 결과가 발생하여야 성립하는 죄인바, 이 사건에 있어 피고인이 피해자를 유기 또는 방치하였는지, 그리고 이러한 피고인의 행위로 인하여 피해자의 사망이라는 결과가 발생하였는지에 관하여 살펴보기로 한다.

B. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court, it is difficult to view that the Defendant’s act constitutes “organic” under Article 271(2) of the Criminal Act, or that there was a causal relationship between the Defendant’s act and the victim’s death with the blood transfusion, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

1) From January 2012, the victim appeared to have difficulty in driving, such as cutting down the left side bridge, and did not good meals, and see the inside side. However, there were no symptoms, such as the victim's physical pain, etc., and the victim did not know that the above behavior was revealed due to the victim's frequent drinking time, and the defendant was unaware of the fact that the victim's health was omitted. As such, even in the statement of the Roy F, the victim's living south D, Don Lin Park, and the head of the house, the victim was living together with the victim, and even in the statement of the Ma F, the victim was f, and the victim was boomed with the same week every day, and even if the Ma F had no special characteristics, the defendant's lawsuit is acceptable because it did not have any specific characteristics.

2) Since the Defendant considered the victim’s sheshesheshesheshesheshe was living together with his/her own house and did not appear to have a respect for alcohol, it appears that the Defendant did not have formed a fluent relationship with the victim, such as living in the second floor of the same house as the victim by living together with the victim, and not living together with him/her. In particular, around the night of February 3, 2012, when the Defendant sought the victim on February 3, 2012, he/she did not want to find the victim because he/she did not want to return she would immediately return to Korea, she did not want to find the victim because she did not want to return she was she was she was under the influence of alcohol, and the Defendant stated that he/she would not look at the interior side even if she was under the influence of alcohol, but did not think that the victim would have been under the influence of drinking, and did not think that the victim was under the influence of drinking and drinking.

3) Although the Defendant did not want to have a relation with the victim but did not want to do so, the victim was regularly found to have his face, arms, and legs after the victim was frighted so that it was difficult for him to move. In addition, the Defendant provided food such as killing, eating, drinking, etc. at the victim's defective shop that he was unable to drink well, and the victim himself issued an order for food, drinking, etc. by making phone call directly to the mobile phone.

4) The Defendant, upon receiving a request from a doctor to undergo an additional inspection on a disease, etc. suspected as a character disease of the victim, refused to go to the hospital on the ground that the victim cannot drink as he/she wishes.

5) As such, the Defendant refused to undergo an inspection at a hospital while drinking only without proper meals, and attempted to communicate with sheshesheshesheshesheet, Dosheet, Dosheet, Emblet Park, etc. However, Dosheet and ParkE reported 119 and reported that she was moving back to a hospital. Meanwhile, at the time of the victim’s death, it is difficult to see that the Defendant was well aware of how the she would have to care for the her university students, and that the Doshe was in de facto marital relationship with the victim, other than the Defendant, cannot be said to have a duty to care the her entirely, insofar as she is the obligor to protect the her victim.

6) The cause of the victim’s death is presumed to be a pulse caused by the skin and duna sule sule sule sule sule sule sule sule sule sule sule sule sule sule sule sule sule sule sule sule sule sule sule sule sule sule sule sule sule sule sule sule sule sule sule sule sule sule sule sule sule sule sule sule sule sule sule sule sule sule sule sul sule sul) which are suspected of a desire.

3. Conclusion

Thus, the above facts charged constitute a case where there is no proof of facts constituting the crime, and thus, the defendant is acquitted pursuant to the latter part of Article 325

Whether the jury verdict and sentencing opinion are guilty or not;

- Crimes: 0 persons

- Non-crimes: Seven persons;

The judge of the presiding judge shall complete the examination

Judges Park Jong-do

Judges Kim Gin-Un