logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 안동지원 2015.10.27 2015고단581
폭행
Text

1. Defendant A’s instant public prosecution is dismissed.

2. Defendant B

A. Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 100,000.

(b).

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

B and Co-defendant A are in a de facto marital relationship.

Defendant

B and A, around 07:00 on July 15, 2015, dealt with the problem of A, which was a five-month period prior to the 101 Dong-dong-si C 101 Dong-dong 1311, and during this period, A was assaulted at the face of Defendant B due to her own flag and her drinking, and Defendant B was at the same place, at the same time and at the same time, the head of A and her son her son her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her face, and the her her she

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. A medical certificate;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to each investigation report and accompanying documents;

1. Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crime;

1. Selection of selective fine for punishment (the amount of fine shall be reduced by considering the circumstances in which joint defendants do not want to have the punishment for each other by compromise, and the extent of violence between both parties is similar, the other party who is dismissed by public prosecution and the defendant should pay the fine with the penalty power);

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

1. The dismissal of prosecution against Defendant A under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. Defendant A and Co-Defendant B are in de facto marital relationship.

Defendant

A, around 07:00 on July 15, 2015, at the same time, was under dispute with A, which was five months before the 101 Dong-dong-si C 101 Dong-gu 1311, and was under dispute with B, and assaulted B at the time of turning about the trees of B and drinking.

2. The crime of this case falls under Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act, and the crime of this case falls under Article 260 (3) of the Criminal Act and cannot be prosecuted against the victim's explicit intent under Article 260 (3) of the same Act. The records of this case show that the victim withdrawn his wish to punish the defendant on August 6, 2015, which was after the prosecution of this case was instituted. Thus, the prosecution of this case is dismissed under Article 327 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act.

arrow