logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2021.01.27 2020노2391
폭행치상
Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. According to the summary of the grounds of appeal, the victim’s statement and the written diagnosis of injury, etc. sufficiently reliable evidence, the fact that the victim suffered injury can be acknowledged due to the Defendant’s assault. Even if the relationship between the Defendant’s assault and the victim’s injury is denied, the crime of assault, which is a reduced fact, should be acknowledged within the scope recognized as identical to the facts charged of the bodily injury, should be established. However, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles and acquitted the Defendant.

2. Determination

A. The lower court: (a) there are statements, investigation reports, diagnosis documents, photographs, etc. of the victim as direct evidence consistent with the facts charged in the instant case in this court and investigative agencies; (b) there is no consistency in the victim’s statements on the part of the defendant who assaulted the victim; and (c) the doctor E who issued the written diagnosis of injury to the victim is a form of a frame that often occurs when the court of the lower judgment prices the objects that were cut off by drinking.

In light of the above medical opinions of the doctor E, the instant injury cannot be ruled out that there is a possibility that the instant injury may occur due to another person’s one-time type, but it does not seem to be shaking, and even according to the victim’s statement, the victim took two-thirds of the face of the defendant after receiving one price from the defendant. In light of the above medical opinions of the doctor E, the instant injury cannot be ruled out for the probability that the injured person would have occurred in the price of the defendant’s head or face. Despite such probability, in order to be found guilty of the instant charges, the Defendant exceptionally taken the victim’s left hand part according to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, and the other part was 5 parts of the left hand.

arrow