(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2015.04.23 2014노1056

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) 서울서부지방법원 2015.04.23 2014노1056

상해

Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. In light of the fact that the victim's statement, which is the evidence submitted by the prosecutor of the summary of the grounds for appeal, is specific and consistent and credibility, even if based on the witness E's statement, there was a dispute between the defendant and the victim, the victim seems to have been aware of the fact that the defendant was injured, and it is confirmed that the defendant suffered injury on the part of the defendant in the letter of diagnosis of injury, although it can be recognized that the defendant inflicted bodily injury on the victim as stated in the facts charged, the court below rejected the credibility of evidence corresponding to the facts charged and acquitted the defendant by

2. Determination

A. On October 25, 2013, around 13:00 on October 25, 2013, the summary of the facts charged in this case: (a) the Defendant, at the Yongsan-gu Seoul Metropolitan Complex Community Center, brought a dispute with the victim D (the age of 80) due to the management of the key of the food warehouse in the center for senior citizens; and (b) took a bath that “the lower year was less than a stone bank from the market floor,” spits the victim, spits the victim, booms the national flag on the kitchen, booms the part of the kitchen, and feld the victim with the victim.

As a result, the defendant suffered a variety of 10-day medical care for the victim.

B. As to the facts charged in the instant case, the lower court determined that: (a) the victim’s statement on the background, content, and means of assault is different from the facts charged in the instant case; and (b) the witness E’s statement was different from that of the instant case; and (c) it cannot be ruled out that there was a possibility of exaggeration or distortion of the background leading up to the injury inflicted by the Defendant; and (b) the statement of E was difficult to believe as it is; and (c) it appears that there was a mutual relation while making a dispute with the state, the victim, and the victim, but it did not seem that it did not seem to be reasonable; and (d) the remaining evidence such as

유사 판례

-서울서부지방법원 2014.07.24 2014고정748

-전주지방법원 2013.12.06 2013노1027

-전주지방법원 2014.12.12 2014노1038

-대전지방법원 2012.10.17 2012노1019

-광주지방법원 순천지원 2018.12.20 2018고단1347