logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 춘천지방법원 속초지원 2016.07.27 2016고정23
폭력행위등처벌에관한법률위반(공동상해)
Text

Defendants shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,500,000.

In the event that the Defendants did not pay the above fine, the Defendants did not pay the fine.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On August 13, 2015, at around 02:15, the Defendants: (a) expressed that Defendant A would take a bath in front of the administrative service room in Yangyang-gun, Yangyang-gun, and (b) had two other persons, who drink with the victim’s D(17 years of age) and carried out drinking, for the reason that the victim would be imprudently, and (c) the victim would do so; (d) Defendant B took one time at the hands-to-face of the hands-to-face, and Defendant B took a bath-to-face with the left hand-to-face, and (e) took a part at one time at the left hand-to-face, and took one time at the end of the hand-to-face.

Defendant A continues to escape from assault, i.e., “h., d.h.,” by the victim following the victim;

The blick theory "I am this blick" was written at one time on the left side.

As a result, the Defendants jointly put the victim into the face, sprinking, sprinking, and sprinking in need of treatment for 21 days.

Summary of Evidence

1. Part of the Defendants’ legal statements

1. Each legal statement of witness E, F, and D;

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. A medical certificate;

1. A damaged photograph;

1. Each investigation report [Defendant A and his defense counsel] asserts that the victim's her her clock is less than two times, and the victim's clocks are not recognized as to the injury since the victim's clocks go beyond the mixed person. ② Defendant B did not assault the victim at all.

However, each of the following circumstances acknowledged by the above evidence, i.e., the victim and witness E made a concrete, relatively consistent statement about the victim's assault history and parts of the instant case, and the credibility of each of the statements is recognized since they made a consistent statement with each other. In particular, the witness E made a statement that "the defendant B was accompanied by any woman at the time of the instant case" and the defendant B made a statement that "the defendant B was accompanied by a woman at the time of the instant case." The above witness's statement is more reliable, and the following day after the instant crime was committed on August 14, 2015.

arrow