logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2017.06.15 2017노274
상해
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In a situation where a misunderstanding of the facts and the legal principles inflict an injury on a person who is misunderstanding the defendant's head debt and being towed, leading the defendant's head debt up to beer, etc., the defendant prevented the victim from being pushed down to defend him/her.

The defendant did not inflict any injury on the victim, and even if not, the defendant's act constitutes a legitimate defense or legitimate act.

The lower court determined otherwise by misapprehending the facts or misapprehending the legal doctrine.

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (one million won in penalty) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court as to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts and legal doctrine, the Defendant’s injury was sufficiently recognized, and the Defendant’s injury was committed during a series of mutual strike and the Defendant’s injury was committed in the course of a series of unfair attack by the victim, or attempted to defend the victim’s injury.

(2) No party shall be deemed to be a party.

There is no error in the lower judgment by misapprehending facts or by misapprehending legal principles.

1) The victim made a statement as follows.

The statements of the victim are consistent and specific from police investigations, and there is no contradiction or non-natural intelligence in itself, even if they are inconsistent and specific.

① The victim, who is a car, was removed from the instant apartment that he/she tried to get a director in the instant apartment (hereinafter referred to as “the instant village”).

② However, the Defendant, who is the owner of the house, was left to the real estate by cutting away the instant fishing village from one’s own and sound.

③ While the victim was found to have a healthy location in real estate and was removed from the instant fishing village, the defendant was found, and the victim “the victim has installed the instant fishing village” and the original part is different.

arrow