logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 동부지원 2013.05.20 2013고정264
재물손괴등
Text

A defendant shall be punished by a fine of 500,000 won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

At around 20:30 on November 27, 2012, the Defendant: (a) took a personal taxi driven by the victim D (the age of 57) in front of the Busan Maritime Transportation Daegu C public notice; and (b) took a bath to “the victim’s horse is prevented from being frighted” on the ground that “the victim’s horse will be prevented from being frighted by 30,000,000,000 if the victim’s market price was owned by the victim, the Defendant damaged the victim’s property by having the part above the 30,000,000 won of the market price.”

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of the police statement law to D;

1. Article 366 of the Criminal Act and the choice of fines concerning the facts constituting the crime;

1. Part concerning dismissal of public prosecution under Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act;

1. On November 27, 2012, around 20:30, the Defendant: (a) took a private taxi driven by the victim D (the age of 57) on the street in front of the Busan Maritime Transportation Daegu C public notice; (b) took a bath to the victim’s horse in order to prevent the victim’s horse traffic in front of the Busan Maritime Transportation Daegu; and (c) took a walk to the victim’s horse on the ground that the victim’s horse was prevented from being frightened., the Defendant used the victim’s horse one time to walk on the part of the victim; (d) fright the victim’s right shoulder by drinking; and (e) fright the victim’s horse in front of the Busan Maritime Transportation Daegu; and (e) fright the victim’s horse in front of the victim.

2. The crime of the above facts charged is the crime of non-violation of intention (Article 260(1) and (3) of the Criminal Act). Since the victim expressed his/her intention not to be punished against the defendant on May 6, 2013 after the prosecution of this case, the above indictment is dismissed pursuant to Article 327 subparag. 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

arrow