logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.05.28 2014고정3370
폭력행위등처벌에관한법률위반(공동폭행)
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

On April 27, 2014, at around 20:15, the Defendant demanded the victim E (54 years of age) to have a right to speak in a large sound from among the Diplomatic Association located in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government for the purpose of voting, the Defendant, as a member of the D church, brought the victim's arms from other members, with four members of the D church in order to attract the victim from the workplace, and brought the victim's back part of the victim's timber to keep the door out.

The Defendant, in collaboration with four teachers whose name is unknown in the above manner, assaulted the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. A protocol of examination of part of the defendant by prosecution;

1. Statement made by witnesses E in the second protocol of the trial;

1. Statement to E by the police;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the results of viewing video recordings CD reproduction (in the face of 62 pages of investigation records);

1. Article 2 (2) and (1) 1 of the Act on the Punishment of Violences, etc. of Specific Crimes, Article 2 (2) and (1) 1 of the same Act, Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act, the selection of fines

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. Judgment on the defense counsel’s assertion under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The gist of the defense counsel's assertion was that the defendant was appointed from the head of the D church as a member of the inspection committee to maintain order in the meeting place, and the joint council (hereinafter "joint council of this case") recorded in the facts constituting the crime in the judgment does not have the right to speak because the victim left voting only in the place, so far, the victim who was in conflict or conflict with the D church did not have any possibility of exercising his right to speak, thereby obstructing the progress of the joint council of this case by demanding the right to speak, etc., and the defendant left the victim within the unique authority of the inspector to maintain order in the joint council of this case, regardless of the direction of the chairman of the D church of this case. Thus, the defendant'

2. Any determination.

arrow