Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint assault)

Ro 000 (RoEDL 000000, 0000, 92 November 12, 92), US Forces in Korea

Housing Dongbcheon-si

Nationality United States of America

Kim Sung-won (prosecutions) and Han Sung-hun (Trial)

Attorney Jin-bok

November 7, 2013

The defendant shall be innocent.

The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

1. The facts charged in this case

Around February 21, 2013, 200 O (GODDM IV, 00000): Around 16, 2013, when the train is in operation between the network and the network, the Plaintiff, etc. was flickly flickly flickly flickly flickly flickly flicked flicked flicked flicked flicked flicked flick within the train while operating the train between the network and the network, and the Defendant et al. was flicked with 00 passengers in the train. As flick flicked flick, the first 0th flick flick was reported to the police.

Therefore, 00 man 0th 00th 0th 0th 2th 2th 2th 20th 2nd 20th 2nd 2nd 2nd 200th 2nd 2nd 2nd 200th 2nd 2nd 2nd 2nd 3th 2nd 2nd 3th 2nd 2nd 3th 2nd 3th 2nd 2nd 2nd 3th 2nd 3th 2nd 3th 2nd 3th 2nd 3th 2nd 3th 2nd 20

Accordingly, the defendant assaulted the victim jointly with 00 man man of 00.

2. Determination

As indicated in the facts charged above, the Defendant’s police statement is almost fluent to the effect that the Defendant assaulted the left part of the victim’s 00 as indicated in the above facts charged. However, in light of the evidence duly admitted and investigated by this court, such as the result of the reproduction of video CDs, the following set of evidence: ① the victim reversed the above police statement in this court and viewed the instant video CD for the first time in this court. Of the above video CDs, the victim 21:18: 49 met on the screen at around 21:18: 49. B was not the Defendant, but the Defendant was the victim of the Defendant’s Cheongba at the time of the instant case. From around 10:18:49, the Defendant did not have any other evidence that the Defendant had appeared in the police room at the time of the instant case, and there was no other physical collision between the Defendant and the victim (the Defendant’s 0:0:00 on the screen and the Defendant’s 10:00 on the platform at the time of this case.

3. Conclusion

Thus, the facts charged of this case constitute a case where there is no proof of crime, and thus, the defendant is acquitted pursuant to the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the summary of the judgment against the defendant is under Article 58 (2) of the Criminal Act, and it is so decided as per Disposition.

Judge Choi Jin-ok