(영문) 청주지방법원 2015.05.22 2015노345 | 리걸엔진

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) 청주지방법원 2015.05.22 2015노345

재물손괴등

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant, as stated in paragraph (2) of the facts charged in this case, did not have any fact that the Defendant either spawns the morale and cups containing water in a restaurant operated by the victim, or spawn the victim

On the other hand, only the table table in the above restaurant was drawn up.

The defendant, as stated in paragraph (3) of the facts charged in the instant case, has broken the flowers owned by the victim on the floor, but in the process, he saw the victim to take a bath.

There is no fact that he or she had the entrance of the restaurant.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below that found the defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged on the ground that the defendant committed an act identical to the above facts charged is erroneous, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court and the first instance court as to the mistake of facts, it is recognized that the Defendant: (a) committed fraud to the victim as stated in each of the facts charged; and (b) took the victim’s bath to the victim; and (c) took the Defendant’s bath to the entrance of the above restaurant.

The defendant's argument in this part of the appeal shall not be accepted.

In other words, the Defendant stated to the purport different from the argument in the grounds of appeal, such as “it is true that the instant World Cup was put on the table of the instant site (the original written opinion submitted, the trial record No. 32),” or “the victim was in the door because of the nature of not opening the door (police statement, investigation record No. 58, 61).”

In short, the Defendant’s statements on each of the above crimes are not consistent.

On the other hand, the police statements of the victim and the testimony in the court of original trial are consistent and concrete.

Furthermore, the victim is extremely likely to bring about the defendant.

유사 판례

-대전지방법원 서산지원 2018.12.19 2018고합94

-춘천지방법원 강릉지원 2017.03.16 2016노555

-수원지방법원 2018.08.16 2017노7468

-창원지방법원 마산지원 2020.01.07 2019고단888

-광주지방법원 2019.07.03 2019고단503