(영문) 대전지방법원 2018.05.10 2017노3268 | 리걸엔진

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) 대전지방법원 2018.05.10 2017노3268

모욕

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses of the trial shall be borne by the defendant.

Reasons

1. Summary of the grounds for appeal: The judgment of the court below which convicted the defendant on the following grounds: misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles.

A. The Defendant, rather than referring the victim to “the Domine, Hashes,” but rather, she merely frighten on his own, and at the time when the Defendant saw the so-called so-called so-called “the Defendant’s family, the victim, and the court.” The Defendant did not have a performance because he was only the Defendant’s family, the victim, and the court. Even if the Defendant publicly h

Even if at the time, the injured party completed a pleading in the lawsuit filed against the defendant's foreign service C and went out of the court, and the other party to the lawsuit's agreement is not contrary to social norms (i) the act that does not go against social norms. (ii) Of the evidence adopted by the court below, the video recorded in the "USB Magane" (hereinafter "the video of this case") was taken by the injured party without the consent of the defendant, and thus, it is not admissible as evidence of unlawful collection. In addition, the victim testified in the court of the court of the court below that "the defendant did not take a bath at first, and the victim expressed a bath at the last time." Since it is inconsistent with the statement at the time of police investigation, the evidence submitted by the injured party (the video of this case seems to have been considered in mind) is not admissible (ii).2).

A. (1) The Defendant asserted the same purport as the above argument in the lower court, but the lower court rejected the Defendant’s assertion on the grounds of the detailed circumstances as indicated in its reasoning.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in comparison with the records, the judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and there is an error of law by misunderstanding the facts as alleged by the defendant and misunderstanding the legal principles.

subsection (b) of this section.

B. ② As to the assertion, 1) citizens’ human beings.

유사 판례

-서울고등법원 2018.11.14 2018노1451

-서울중앙지방법원 2018.05.17 2017노3507

-전주지방법원 2017.05.12 2016노1761

-대법원 2017.02.09 2016도20248

-수원지방법원 2016.07.14 2014노4336