logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 고양지원 2014.12.11 2014고정810
폭행
Text

Of the facts charged in this case, the prosecution against assault against C is dismissed.

Of the facts charged in the instant case, D and E.

Reasons

1. Around August 30, 2013, the summary of the facts charged is as follows: (a) at the “G screen golf course” operated by the Defendant in Yongsan-gu, Yongsan-gu, Yongsan-gu; (b) at around 23:40 on August 30, 2013, the Defendant had a dispute over the customer’s victim D(54), C(48), E(50 years old), and D(50 years old); (c) at the same time, the Defendant had the face of the victim D’s flaps and drinking three times; (d) had the victim C’s face flab; (e) had the victim E face flae; and (e) assaulted the victim E flabing it.

2. On November 18, 2014, the victim C expressed that he/she does not want to be punished by the defendant during the process of examining the witness in this court. As such, the prosecution against the victim C among the facts charged in this case is dismissed in accordance with Article 327 subparag. 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act and Article 260(3) of the Criminal Act.

2. There are evidence that corresponds to the facts charged of assault against the victim D and E, the legal statement of D, C, and E, the police interrogation protocol of the victim C, and E, the written statement of C, and the written statement of the police statement of H, which are evidence corresponding to the facts charged of assault against the victim D and E.

First of all, I examine the violence against D.

D은 수사기관 및 법정에서 이 사건 공소사실과 같이 피고인과 언쟁 중 피고인이 자신의 멱살을 잡고 왼쪽 눈 옆을 3대 때렸다고 진술하였고, C 또한 같은 취지로 수사기관에서 피고인이 주먹으로 D을 때리자 자신이 깜짝 놀라 피고인의 멱살을 잡았다고 진술하였다.

However, C did not reverse this in the court and did not see the face of D, and only stated that the defendant and D were able to have flicked first.

In addition, D statements that he was forced to stop only by speech while driving far away from the situation, and E made a statement that he was deemed to have met with the defendant in the process of speaking D.

On the other hand, the statement written by D and C on the day of the instant case is where C is inside.

arrow