logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2013.05.01 2012고정2901
폭행
Text

The sentence of sentence against the defendant shall be suspended.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On September 21, 2012, the Defendant, at around 21:30, 2012, committed assault against the victim, such as the victim’s flapsing away from a taxi on the side near the Songpa-gu Seoul Olympic Winter Games, Songpa-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (56 years of age), who was requested to drive the victim’s walk, while driving the victim’s motor vehicle on the same side, the victim was late while driving the victim’s day, and the victim also took a bath to the telephone, thereby refusing to drive the motor vehicle.

Summary of Evidence

1. Application of the respective legal statements of witnesses C and D to the Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts, the choice of a fine, and the choice of a fine;

1. A fine of 300,000 won which is suspended for a sentence; and

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

1. The Defendant’s defense attorney’s defense as to the assertion of defense counsel under Article 59(1) of the Criminal Act (such as the minor degree of the Defendant’s assault, the primary crime, and the circumstances leading to the instant crime) of the suspended sentence (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 200Do1348, Apr. 1, 200).

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 victim first saw the Defendant’s breath while doing so and setting up against the Defendant’s breath, and then the Defendant breathdd the breath in a state where the Defendant and the victim performed breath, and (ii) the victim did not exercise other tangible power than the Defendant’s breath, it constitutes self-defense by the same method as the victim’s act of killing the breath in the same manner against the aforementioned unjust attack.

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

arrow