logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2015.09.10 2015고정1334
폭행
Text

Defendant

A shall be punished by a fine of 500,000 won.

Defendant

Where A fails to pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

A around 20:30 on March 3, 2015, around D convenience points in Seongbuk-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, caused the injury to the victim, such as fluoral salt, which requires approximately two weeks of treatment on the ground that the Defendant’s vehicle prevents the front of the vehicle driven by the victim B (35 years of age) and the victim resists and resists the light.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant A’s legal statement

1. Protocol concerning the examination of suspect B;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of the injury diagnosis certificate;

1. Relevant Article of the Criminal Act and Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of penalties.

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The dismissal part of the prosecution under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. On March 3, 2015, around 20:30 on the charge against Defendant B, at the front of the D convenience store located in Seongbuk-gu Seoul, Seongbuk-gu Seoul, the victim A (age 26) resisted the front of the Defendant’s driving vehicle, and accordingly, the victim A (age 26) resisted the front of the Defendant’s driving vehicle.

Accordingly, the victim spits the defendant's timber in his hand, the defendant's face by drinking him, and the defendant spits the victim's face in his hand against the victim's act, and assaults the victim by spiting the victim's face.

2. The crime of assaulting the victim is a crime falling under Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act and cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s explicit intent pursuant to Article 260(3) of the same Act. According to the records, the victim expressed his/her intention not to prosecute the defendant on June 22, 2015, which is after the prosecution of this case. Thus, this part of the prosecution is dismissed pursuant to Article 327(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act.

arrow