logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2013.11.28 2013고단2707
폭행
Text

Defendant

The sentence for B shall be suspended.

Defendant

A The prosecution against A is dismissed.

Reasons

범 죄 사 실(피고인 B에 대하여) 피고인 B은 2013. 7. 19. 04:20경 서울 은평구 D 앞길에서, 피해자 A(36세, 여)가 피고인 B이 친구와 함께 있는 것을 보고 그곳으로 다가가 “밥 먹으로 가자”라고 말하면서 그들에게 접근한 것을 이유로 시비가 되어 다투다가 피해자의 머리채를 잡아 끌어당겨 바닥에 넘어뜨리고, 넘어져 있는 피해자의 얼굴 등을 주먹으로 수회 때리고 발로 찼다.

As a result, the defendant injured the victim about three weeks of treatment, such as satisfying face, etc.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Examination protocol of suspect A and E;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on diagnosis of an injury, and photographs of an injury;

1. Relevant Articles of the Criminal Act and the choice of punishment concerning the facts constituting a crime: Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Detention at a workhouse: Articles 70 and 69 (2) (50,000 won per day) of the Criminal Act;

1. Punishment to be suspended: A fine not exceeding one million won;

1. Suspension of sentence: Article 59 (1) of the Criminal Act (the fact that the defendant is the first offender and that an agreement has been reached with the victim) (the rejection of prosecution against the defendant A);

1. The summary of the facts charged was around 04:20 on July 19, 2013, Defendant A: (a) reported that the victim B (here, 19 years old) was fright together with her natives; and (b) subsequently, Defendant A accessed the victim’s face twice on the hand of the victim on the ground that the victim refused to do so; and (c) shaking the head debt.

Accordingly, the defendant committed assault against the victim.

2. The above facts charged are crimes falling under Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act, which are crimes of no punishment against one’s own will under Article 260(3) of the Criminal Act. Since the victim explicitly expressed his/her intent not to be punished on November 28, 2013, which was after the prosecution of this case was instituted, the prosecution is dismissed pursuant to Article 327(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act.

arrow