logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2019.08.12 2019노172
특수재물손괴등
Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of 6 million won.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. There is no misunderstanding of the facts by the Defendant citing a steel stude and causing the victim to be frightened, or when the victim’s head was frightened.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which convicted the victim of special assault among the facts charged of this case is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence imposed by the court below on the grounds that the court below sentenced the unfair sentencing (two months of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, and forty hours of violence therapy)

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, namely, the victim stated in the court of the court below that the defendant was under the influence of alcohol at the time and incidental to the articles in his house, and that the victim's wife was at the time when she was faced with the defendant's hair by her hand when she was faced with the defendant's hair. The victim made a concrete statement as to the main part of the situation at the time when she was found to be reliable (the victim did not specifically state the violence situation corresponding to the facts charged in this case in the process of the police witness statement, but there was no specific statement about the violence situation corresponding to the facts charged in this case at the time of the court of the court below, compared with the victim's ordinary assault, the victim was unable to think that the defendant was an assault to the extent that she was under the influence of her bar, and the head was not under the influence of her hand when she was under the influence of her hand, and the defendant could not be under the influence of her body at the time of the victim's statement.

Therefore, it is true.

arrow