logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 춘천지방법원 영월지원 2015.11.27 2015고정134
폭행
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 500,000.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, the amount of KRW 100,000 shall be paid.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

C was a public official in charge of DNA viewing safety management and E (Administration 6), and Defendant A was a public official in charge of the same division and E team.

On August 4, 2014, at around 14:00, the Defendant confirmed that the victim C was unable to check civil defense alarm facilities from the Gangwon-do office, and asked the victim to get repeatedly pointed out by the higher government office by phoneing to the Defendant of his subordinate staff who was in charge of civil defense warning facilities. However, on the ground that the Defendant took a dispute with the other party, and the Defendant got off to the office in which the Defendant was in charge of the defense, by hand, the Defendant dial manager and the disaster situation room, and assaulted the victim’s dubling and dub by booming the Defendant’s dub, against his hand.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Application of the respective statutory statements of C, F and G to the Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the facts constituting the crime;

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

1. The Defendant asserts that the illegality is excluded as a justifiable act that does not violate self-defense or social rules, on the ground that the Defendant and his defense counsel’s assertion against the Defendant under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act is a legitimate act that does not violate self-defense or social rules, on the ground that the Defendant, first of all, took breath from the victim’s strong wind to breathize it.

However, in full view of each of the statements made by the preceding witnesses, it is recognized that the Defendant, first against the victim who dump dump, dump dump and sulbbbbbling the victim's dump. In light of the degree of the assault of this case and the situation and circumstances before and after, it is difficult to view the Defendant's act as a legitimate act that does not go against social norms or as a legitimate self-defense to defend the present illegal infringement of the Defendant or others, and thus, it is difficult to view

arrow