(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.07.27 2018노72

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) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.07.27 2018노72

폭행

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal doctrine merely prevents the victim from entering the 1st floor office, without any assaulting the victim, and the wife suffered by the victim is not a assault by the defendant.

Even if the facts of assault by the defendant are recognized, the illegality is excluded as a legitimate defense of the victim's business obstruction or a passive resistance act.

B. An improper sentence of the lower court (an amount of KRW 500,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances acknowledged by misunderstanding the facts and misapprehension of the legal principles, which were duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, namely, ① the Defendant prevented the victim’s chest from entering the investigative agency’s office by hand.

When considering the fact that the defendant made a statement, etc. (the 29th page of the evidence record), the defendant himself acknowledges the fact of physical contact with the victim, and the CD (the 40th page of the evidence record) recorded at the time of the crime, the fact that the defendant used the victim as recorded in the facts of the crime in the judgment of the court below while the defendant made a horse fighting with the victim while the defendant made a horse fighting with the victim that the victim would go, he can sufficiently recognize the fact that the defendant used the victim as recorded in the judgment of the court below (the defendant alleged that the wife suffered the victim was not caused by the crime of assault other than the crime of injury, but the defendant was prosecuted for the crime of assault, regardless of the reasons of the wife suffered by the victim). In addition, in light of the contents of dispute between the victim and the lessor, D, and D's employees, the victim interfered with the lessor's business in light of the contents of dispute, the degree of dispute, etc.

In addition, it can not be seen as well.

유사 판례

-대전지방법원 2016.08.11 2016노322

-서울중앙지방법원 2018.11.09 2018노1269

-춘천지방법원 강릉지원 2017.10.19 2017노187

-인천지방법원 2016.09.21 2016노1577

-대전지방법원 2018.01.17 2017노2290