(영문) 광주지방법원 2016.07.13 2016노1433 | 리걸엔진

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) 광주지방법원 2016.07.13 2016노1433

폭행

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant, by mistake of fact, was unilaterally assaulted by the injured party and did not assault the injured party.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (four months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. (1) The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged by integrating the admitted evidence.

(2) In full view of the following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court’s judgment, the lower court’s determination is justifiable.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

① The victim F and witness G stated in the investigative agency and the court of the court below that “A under the influence of alcohol: (a) the Defendant was fluencing on the main points of this case to customers; (b) the Victim F, who was drinking on the main points of this case, prevented the Defendant; and (c) took out the Defendant; and (d) the Defendant and the Victim F, outside the main points of this case, assaulted each other,” (Evidence No. 18,28,47, trial records 39,44 pages); and (b) the Defendant and the Victim F, who was flucing on the body of each other, made a false statement so that they may be disadvantageous to the Defendant even when taking charge of the punishment for perjury.”

② Although the statement of the victim F and witness G is not partially consistent or has different parts as to the developments of the instant case, it appears to be a meaningful difference that may arise when a natural memory room or a statement made by an investigative agency due to the passage of time is prepared in the protocol. As such, the above statement concerning the instant crime cannot be seen as a circumstance to suspect the credibility of the statement.

B. The extent of the assault inflicted by the Defendant on the victim is not so severe, and the fact that the Defendant suffered an injury due to the assault by the victim of the Defendant’s India is favorable.

On the other hand, the defendant is from investigative agencies to the trial.

유사 판례

-서울북부지방법원 2018.10.26 2018노1279

-의정부지방법원 2017.01.17 2016노3308

-인천지방법원 2018.06.21 2017노4537

-의정부지방법원 2016.05.31 2016노497

-의정부지방법원 2021.01.14 2020노558