(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2013.08.23 2013노593

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) 서울동부지방법원 2013.08.23 2013노593

폭행

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that the court below unilaterally rejected the victim's statement on the ground of the defendant's change of defense, and acquitted the defendant on the ground that there is an error of law that affected the conclusion of the judgment by admitting the fact that the court below erred by misunderstanding the fact that the victim's statement was reliable and the defendant's change of defense is inconsistent.

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal following the ex officio judgment on the amendment of indictment, the prosecutor examined ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal, and the prosecutor applied for the amendment of indictment with the content that the facts charged in this case are modified by this court's permission. In this regard, the judgment of the court below on the previous facts charged cannot be maintained any more.

3. In conclusion, the judgment below is reversed pursuant to Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the grounds for appeal by the prosecutor, and the judgment below is reversed and it is again decided as follows.

【Discretionary Judgment】

1. On June 11, 2012, the Defendant: (a) around 08:50, the charge of the instant case committed an assault against the victim C (the 63 years of age) in D Apartment Building, Gangdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, on the part of the Defendant, with the quier who pushed the Defendant’s chest and her chest, and the victim was pushed the Defendant’s chest and her chest in response thereto; and (b) committed an assault against the victim’s hair.

2. The defendant's lawsuit and its judgment

A. As to the above facts charged, the Defendant stated to the effect that, since the victim first attacked against him, the victim was prevented by his hand in order to no longer be subject to assault, and the victim’s head was aground in the process, and that this is not a passive defensive act, and thus, it does not constitute a crime.

B. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, the following facts are revealed.

참조조문

-형사소송법 제364조 제2항

유사 판례

-인천지방법원 2020.10.08 2020고정1108

-수원지방법원 안산지원 2018.11.27 2018고정458

-대구지방법원 2016.08.11 2015노3856

-서울중앙지방법원 2014.05.29 2013고정4439

-의정부지방법원 고양지원 2013.08.22 2013고단540