logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 동부지원 2017.3.24.선고 2017고정242 판결
가.모욕나.폭력행위등처벌에관한법률위반(공동상해)
Cases

2017Gohap242A. Defluence

(b) Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act;

Defendant

1.(a) A

2.(a) B

3.(a) C

4.(a) D.

Prosecutor

Kim J-J (Court of Prosecution) and Park le-be (Court of Justice)

Imposition of Judgment

March 24, 2017

Text

Defendants shall be punished by a fine of five hundred thousand won.

In the event that the Defendants did not pay the above fines, the Defendants shall be confined in the workhouse for a period of 100,000 won converted from one day.

The provisional payment of the amount equivalent to each of the above fines shall be ordered.

Reasons

Criminal History Office

Defendant C and B are legal marital relations, Defendant D are in internal relations with Defendant C, and Defendant A is the male dynamics of Defendant B.

1. Defendant B, A

(a) Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act;

On April 20, 2016, at around 12:30, the Defendants discovered the victim C (38 years of age) and the victim D (40 years of age) from the “F” corridor in Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Gwangju on April 20, 2016, and Defendant B found the victim C (38 years of age) and the victim D (40 years of age). Defendant B did not only look at how you can do so. The Defendant “I can do so. I do not see how you can do so. I do so. I will see the victim C’s click at a time and walk with the victim’s click at a time.” The Defendant d "I spathn anywhere you can spathn,” while she spawnds the head and spacing it.

Accordingly, Defendant A, using a mobile phone, taken the victim's appearance, and opened the victim's name to the eth, the same year, the eth, the same year, and the eths of the eth, and the eths of the eths.g., the victim's body until the death of the victim, and the eth, the ethic body of the victim's body, and the ethic body of the victim's body, the ethic body of the victim's body of the victim's body, and the ethic body of the victim's body of the victim's body of the victim's body of the victim's body of the victim's body of the victim's body of the victim's body of the victim's body of the victim's body of the victim's body of the victim's body of the victim's body of the victim's body of the victim's body of the victim's body of the victim's body of the victim's body of the victim's body.

As a result, the Defendants assaulted victims to the victim C, and inflicted injury on the victim C, such as spawn, etc. which requires approximately two weeks of treatment, and the victim D’s spawn and tension, respectively.

(b) Definating;

around 16:00 on May 13, 2016, Defendants made a public insult of the victim by referring to the victim D as “a year, the same year, the same year, the year, and the year, at any time on the face of the money,” and Defendant A, who was next to Defendant A, made a public insult of the victim by referring to the victim D as “a year, the same year, the same year, the same year, the year, and the year, at any time on the face of the money, the year, and the year, the year, the year, the year, and the year, the year, the year, and the year, the year, and the year, the year, the year, and the year, the year, and the year, and the year, the year, and the year, the year, and the year, and the year, shall be, and the year, the year, the year

2. Defendant C, D

At around 16:00 on May 13, 2016, the Defendants stated that, among many customers in the above store, the victim B’s cell phone shooting defect, Defendant D’s cell phone shooting defect, Defendant C’s “the same year of illness” to the victim B, and Defendant C, who was next to the victim B, called “the victim B shall not be able to take any bridges even if he would be able to fill the bridge.” Accordingly, the victim B, which was next to the victim B, read as “the victim A,” “the victim A,” “the victim A,” “the head of scam, scam, scam, scam, and bnish,” and “the victim A, scambling,” which read as “the victim A,” and thereby, the Defendants openly insulting the victim B and the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Legal statement of the witness B;

1. Each police statement made against A, C, and D;

1. In light of the facts acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court, the following facts are revealed: (a) investigation report (as to a copy of a written opinion and on-site CCTV attachment); (b) investigation report (as to the attachment of CCTV to the complaint and CCTV closure screen); and (c) investigation report (as to the attachment of CCTV), and (d) investigation report (as to the crime of Defendant A and B, there is no injury or insult to the other party; and (b) investigation of the crime of Defendant A and B, according to CCTV screen, it is confirmed that the above defendants, which had been highly dead at the time of the instant case, exercised violence against C and D inside and outside the telecom; and (b) the damage statement of Defendant C and B is specific and natural in relation to each crime of Defendant C and D; and (b) it is consistent with each other; and (c) Defendant C is also a person who has used insulting speech. All of the facts charged in the instant case are found guilty).

1. Article relevant to the facts constituting an offense and the selection of punishment;

(a) Defendant A: Article 2(2)3 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, Article 257(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of joint injury) and Article 311 of the Criminal Act;

B. Defendant B: Article 2(2)3 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, Article 257(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of joint injury) and Article 311 of the Criminal Act (the point of insulting a fine)

(d) Defendant D: Article 311 of the Criminal Act (Selection of Fine)

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

Defendant A, B, and C: the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act

1. Detention in a workhouse;

Articles 70 and 69(2) of the Criminal Act

1. Order of provisional payment;

Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

Judges

Judges Kim Gung-do

arrow