(영문) 광주지방법원 순천지원 2015.06.11 2015고단731

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 광주지방법원 순천지원 2015.06.11 2015고단731

상해

Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

[Criminal Power] The Defendant was sentenced to two years of suspension of the execution of six months of imprisonment with prison labor for an injury in the order of the Gwangju District Court on October 15, 2014, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on October 23, 2014 and is currently in force 13 times of the same kind of power as well as the period of postponement.

【Criminal Facts】

Around 03:00 on April 1, 2015, the Defendant expressed the victim D (the age of 65) who is an apartment security guard of the same apartment, “I am feasia” to “I am feasia to be feasia to be feasia to be feasia to be feasia to be feasia to be feasia to be feasia to be feasia to be feasia to be feasia to be feasia to be feasia to be feasia to be feasia to be fasia

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of D police statement;

1. A photograph of damage and a medical certificate;

1. Previous records: The application of criminal records, inquiry and other Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Article 257(1) of the Criminal Act applicable to criminal facts, Article 257(1) of the choice of criminal punishment, grounds for sentencing of sentence [the scope of recommendation] general injury [the grounds for sentencing of sentence] and no basic area (4 to 1 year and 6 months] of sentence [the decision of sentence] [the victim] imprisonment was agreed with the victim although August was sentenced, and the victim's damage was not significantly restricted, although the victim's damage was agreed with the victim. However, although the defendant had many same power, and in particular, it was judged that the crime was committed again during the suspended execution period due to the same kind of crime, and the risk of recidivism was high, it was judged that the defendant committed the crime again, and that the crime was poor, and that the crime was committed at the same time, and that the crime was committed at the risk of recidivism is likely to be committed, it is ordered as ordered

참조조문

-형법 제257조 제1항

유사 판례

-광주지방법원 순천지원 2015.07.21 2015고단770

-광주지방법원 2013.01.11 2012고단5427

-대전지방법원 서산지원 2018.05.16 2018고정75

-부산지방법원 2017.08.09 2017고단3096

-수원지방법원 성남지원 2017.06.21 2016고단1727