logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.10.12 2017고합393
살인미수
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

Seized evidence No. 1 shall be confiscated.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

From the beginning of 2016, the Defendant became aware of the fact that the Defendant came to know with the victim through D, which is a third village of the victim C(43 tax).

Defendant: (a) The instant D was detained while carrying on the business of importing salted fish; and (b) the instant D was placed in charge of the salted fish business instead of the instant D; (c) the victim was doubtful that the Defendant arbitrarily used the Company’s funds while carrying on the salted fish business; and accordingly, the Defendant and the victim did not have any adequate appraisal.

On April 5, 2017, the Defendant, at the time of Sinpo City E 502, around 03:00, on April 4, 2017, on the ground that when the Defendant was to run a business in a telephone with the victim around April 4, 2017, the Defendant her talked with the victim due to bad fishing, but the Defendant her talked with the victim, on the ground that the Defendant did not treat the said D in good faith.

Ultimately, the Defendant, on the ground that it was bad for the Defendant to have a brush dispute with the victim, had the victim kills the victim, and had the victim talked around the luminous car located in Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government F vehicle.

On April 5, 2017, around 04:10, the Defendant boarded and arrived at a taxi in front of the business site of the said “G” vehicle, while getting off and leaving a taxi, and immediately waiting the victim before the said “G” vehicle luminous business site, the Defendant attempted to murder the victim’s left side right side by taking up the excessive amount (22cc in total length, 11cm per day, 2.5cm, 2.5cm in width, 1 evidence No. 1) prepared in advance (i.e., the total length of 22cm, 11cc in width, 2.5cm in width, 2.5cm in length). However, the Defendant did not go to the wind for the victim to receive medical treatment at the Central University Hospital after getting out of the scene of damage.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. A protocol concerning the suspect examination of the accused by the prosecution;

1. Statement of each amnesty against H and C;

1. Each photograph (Evidence 2,16,26);

1. Each investigation report (list 5,10 of evidence);

1. CCTV images and CCTV video CDs (Evidence 6,6-1);

1. Medical opinions;

1. A protocol of seizure and a list of seizure;

1. The Acts and subordinate statutes of the response requested for appraisal;

arrow