logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2016.03.17 2015고정3449
상해
Text

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

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On January 25, 2015, the Defendant: (a) obstructeded the front of a taxi on the front of E, located in Youngdo, Busan, on the ground that he refused to take passengers while driving the cab in front of E (59 years of age). On the other hand, the Defendant: (b) inflicted an injury on the victim, such as dump, dump, dump, dump, fump, etc., in need of approximately three weeks of medical treatment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Entry of a defendant in part in the third public trial records;

1. Statement made by C by the witness in the fourth public trial protocol;

1. Partial statement of the witness F;

1. A report on the investigation of the victim on January 25, 2015 and a photograph of the victim;

1. Application of the legislation in its opinion;

1. Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the relevant criminal facts and Article 257 (Selection of Penalty) of the Criminal Act;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act concerning the order of provisional payment;

1. Article 186 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act;

1. The defendant and his/her defense counsel's assertion as to the defendant and his/her defense counsel's assertion of Article 32 (1) 3, Article 25 (3) 3, and Article 25 (4) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Litigation, etc. of Application for Compensation Order (the factual basis necessary for calculating the amount of damage inflicted on the victim is not clear, and the scope of compensation liability is not clear, and it is not reasonable to examine it in criminal proceedings) of the defendant and his/her defense counsel. The defendant and his/her defense counsel, who intend to refuse the defendant's refusal of taking passengers and to leave the taxi from the taxi, led the victim's taxi back to the defendant's driver's dancing, leading the defendant to the taxi, and they exceeded the defendant. However, the defendant did not inflict an injury on the victim's hand.

However, the injured party C consistently from investigative agencies to this court, "the accused and the injured party's driver's taxi who intends to leave the taxi without carrying his/her driving is shocking and the injured party gets off from the taxi, and the defendant gets off the taxi.

arrow