(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2017.01.25 2016고단2988

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 2017.01.25 2016고단2988

경범죄처벌법위반

Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. The summary of the facts charged is indicated as “09:25 around September 16, 2016 in the facts charged,” but according to the receipt of the 112 Declaration (the nine page of the investigation record), the time of reporting appears to be “09:07 around” and the correction is made.

The police officer called 112 at a 112 place, called “as soon as possible,” and called “as soon as possible,” stated that the police officer was able to find the Defendant as a police box under the influence of alcohol due to a defect in the telephone, and that the police officer was able to find the Defendant as a police box under the influence of alcohol. As to the reason that the police officer arrived at the police box and reported, “

In order to "the water has changed", the unclaimed crime or disaster has been reported to the public official by falsity.

2. On the other hand, there are only documents that correspond to the facts charged, i.e., the report of the trial control and the report of 112, and each of the above evidence alone can only be acknowledged that the defendant sent a phone call to 112 to find the fact that " promptly changed," and it is insufficient to recognize the fact that the defendant reported a false crime or disaster without the defendant.

B. Abaly, the Defendant argued that “a crime was damaged and reported to the police, and not a false report was made on a crime that was not committed,” and that the Defendant was unable to properly state the crime or accident while breathly under the influence of alcohol.

report by false means;

It cannot be readily concluded, and there is a fact that the Defendant, even before making a report as stated in the facts charged, immediately cut off or did not respond to 112/7 times even before making a report. However, such circumstance alone alone is difficult to deem that the report on each telephone and the facts charged as mentioned above is a false report.

Therefore, the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is insufficient to recognize the facts charged, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

3. In conclusion, the facts charged of this case are without proof of crime.

유사 판례

-서울서부지방법원 2017.05.11 2017노206

-창원지방법원 거창지원 2017.09.27 2017고단266

-부산지방법원 2018.04.26 2017노4823

-수원지방법원 2017.05.12 2016고단7653

-수원지방법원 2018.07.19 2018고정500