logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 제주지방법원 2019.07.19 2018고정185
존속폭행치상
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine not exceeding seven hundred thousand won.

Where the defendant fails to pay the above fine, one million won shall be the one day.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a victim B (n, 62 years of age).

At around 19:30 on August 13, 2017, the Defendant got the victim to use the head part of the victim on the floor, and let the victim use it on the floor, while the victim had an miscarriage dispute with the victim due to inheritance at the residence of the victim in Jeju City.

As a result, the defendant, who is a lineal ascendant, suffered from an injury to other gambling, by distributing about two weeks of medical treatment.

Summary of Evidence

1. A statement made by the witness B in this Court;

1. Statement of statement concerning B prepared by the police;

1. Entry of a general diagnosis report on B prepared with D;

1. Determination as to the assertion by the defendant and defense counsel of the relevant photographs and each photographic photo

1. The summary of the assertion was born between the deceased father E and the victim. After the deceased on March 2017, the Defendant’s punishment system and the victim had a dispute over the miscarriage of the deceased father.

On August 13, 2017, the victim called the victim's house by phone to the defendant on August 13, 2017, and the defendant said that he/she was the victim's house, and he/she was at the time of the victim's dispute.

Accordingly, the defendant's defect that the victim's arms are prevented from getting off and getting out, and the victim's efforts to get out of the arms were used to get out of the balance.

Therefore, the defendant only prevented the assault of the victim, but did not cause the victim to suffer an injury by assaulting the victim.

2. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court as seen earlier, namely, the victim consistently from the investigative agency to the date and place of the instant crime, stated that the Defendant was divided into the victim’s head, who is a lineal ascendant, at the time and place of the instant crime, and there is no special reason to make a false statement about the Defendant’s act, the mother, who is the child, even though there was a dispute over miscarriage.

arrow