beta
Text
The defendant is not guilty, and the summary of the judgment of innocence is publicly notified.
Reasons
1. On September 21, 2013, the Defendant: (a) around 20:35 on September 21, 2013, the summary of the facts charged: (b) around 31:15, the Defendant: (c) reported that the Defendant was leading the victim C (the age of 51) in the Yansan-dong, Chungcheongnam-dong, Yandong-dong, 31-15, and led the victim to the movement; and (d) during the dispute, the Defendant was using the breathal breath in the ground floor to put the victim into the ground floor for approximately four weeks of treatment.
2. The defendant's assertion and judgment
A. The gist of the assertion is that the victim first saw the Defendant’s breath in the process of spreading breath, and the Defendant only breathed the victim’s face, and the Defendant did not have the victim’s face taken.
B. According to each of the statements in the investigation agencies of the defendant, the defendant, D and the victim C, and in this court, the defendant and the victim, who followed the defendant and D, who had led the defendant to her opening in the field of the field of the Yanananancheon, in the time and time indicated in the facts charged, are able to hear the statement to the effect that "if the victim is not allowed to her to her opening in the playground," and they are in a dispute with each other, and the facts that the victim was going beyond the floor of the playground are recognized.
However, as to whether the victim got out of the playground floor of the playground, the health room, the investigation agency of C, and each of these statements in this court can be seen to be in exaggeration of the fact of damage in light of his/her legal testimony attitude, and the specific contents of the statement are also lacking credibility.
In addition, it is difficult to believe that the statement of the police statement about E is not only inconsistent with the motive that he has made as a witness at an investigative agency, but also it is doubtful whether he has actually observed the scene of the instant assault in light of the content of the statement.
Therefore, the facts charged can be acknowledged except for the statements of victims C and E, which are difficult to believe as above.