logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2019.05.10 2018고정2403
폭행
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of 300,000 won.

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

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On May 2, 2018, at the entrance of the building B in Bupyeong-gu Incheon, the Defendant committed assault, such as booming the breath of the victim at the end of the vision, on the ground that the victim C (the age of 76) and the Defendant throw away waste before the house of the victim C.

Summary of Evidence

1. C’s legal statement;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to photographs of damaged parts attached to a report on internal investigation (a statement of suspected victims and a case concerning CCTV);

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

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

1. Judgment on the assertion by the defendant and his/her defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The gist of the assertion is that the Defendant unilaterally committed an assault against the victim and did not commit an assault against the victim.

The defendant's act of defending him/her out of a part of violence committed by the victim constitutes self-defense against the victim.

2. Determination

A. An ordinary act of attack and a defense has been conducted between persons who conduct a fighting in line with the relevant legal principles, and at the same time, the act of attack and a defense has the nature of both areas, which are the act of attack. Thus, even if they appear to be fighting one another, barring special circumstances, such as where one party unilaterally committed an illegal attack and the other party exercised force as a means of resistance to protect himself/herself from such attack, barring special circumstances, such as where one party unilaterally committed an attack and the other party exercised force as a means of resistance to escape from the attack, it cannot be deemed as a legitimate act for defense or self-defense.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2011Do13927, Dec. 8, 2011). (B)

Judgment

The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by this Court, i.e., the defendant and the victim's body fighting are the victim C's house in which the defendant had a usual dispute due to waste dumping.

arrow