logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2014.01.16 2013노1967
상해
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The defendant of mistake of facts found the defendant's residence and raised the issue of payment of the fee and expenses following the successful bid of the apartment in the past, and the entrance was immediately closed, and even though there was no injury by making the victim close, as shown in the facts charged in this case, the court below found the defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case, which affected the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding the facts and misunderstanding it.

B. The sentence of a fine of KRW 1,000,000 imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In other words, the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of mistake of facts: ① the victim made a consistent statement from the investigative agency to the court of the court below to the effect that the victim was scambling the victim by scambling it over the floor; ② the victim was hospitalized in the F Hospital for three days and received pharmacologic treatment and physical therapy due to scambling, etc.; ② the record recording recording the conversation between the defendant and the victim at the time of the instant case (29 pages of investigation record); and the I District of Daejeon and 119 reported the victim's assault and the victim's injury by scambling the victim at the time and place in the judgment of the court of the court below (62 pages of investigation record). Thus, this part of the defendant's assertion is without merit.

B. We examine the judgment on the assertion of unfair sentencing, the fact that the defendant has no record of punishment for the same kind of crime, and the crime of this case is contingent punishment in the process of the victim's finding the defendant's house first before the defendant's house and demanding a fee based on the past apartment bid process, and there are circumstances to consider the circumstance.

arrow