(영문) 울산지방법원 2013.05.24 2013고정193

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) 울산지방법원 2013.05.24 2013고정193

상해

Text

The sentence of sentence against the defendant shall be suspended.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On August 24, 2012, at around 01:30 on August 24, 2012, the Defendant reported the breakdown of the credit card to the closure of the security company, which was installed in front of the D convenience store located in Ulsan-gu, Ulsan-gu, Seoul, on the ground that the Defendant got approximately 20 minutes or passed, and the Defendant was assaulted together with the bath theory on the ground that the Defendant got her chest, and that the Defendant got her chest more than once by pushed the victim’s chest, thereby making it difficult for the victim to know the number of days of treatment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness E and F;

1. The suspect interrogation protocol of the defendant and E;

1. The police statement concerning F;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports (as to attachment of photographs of the damaged body);

1. Relevant Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts, the choice of a fine, and the choice of a fine;

1. A fine not exceeding 500,000 won to be suspended;

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

1. The defendant and his defense counsel asserts that the defendant's act of threatening the victim's chest constitutes self-defense or legitimate act.

However, in light of the following circumstances that can be recognized by comprehensively taking account of the evidence as stated in the judgment, i.e., (i) the Defendant was assaulted by the victim along with the abusive theory, and (ii) the Defendant was able to kill the victim’s breath while taking the breath to the side of the building; and (iii) the victim’s means and degree of harm inflicted on the Defendant; and (iv) the Defendant’s act, means, method, and consequence of the act, etc., the Defendant’s crime of this case constitutes legitimate self-defense as an act to escape from the current unjust infringement on the Defendant’s body.

It can not be viewed as a justifiable act that does not violate the social norms as a passive and low resistance act.

Therefore, it is true.

참조조문

유사 판례

-울산지방법원 2013.08.30 2013노481

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.09.20 2017고단848

-서울중앙지방법원 2015.11.19 2015고정3828

-의정부지방법원 2013.11.14 2013고정1415

-서울중앙지방법원 2015.10.13 2015고정3513