logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2013.10.15 2013고단1995
폭행등
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

『2013고단1995』 피고인은 2013. 7. 21. 23:25경 서울 은평구 C에 있는 ‘D’ 식당 앞길에서, 식당 주인과 시비 후에 계속 화가 난다는 이유로 아무런 상관도 없는 피해자 E(14세)에게 “씨발 새끼야, 손주뻘 되는 새끼야” 등의 욕설을 하며 손으로 피해자의 멱살을 잡고 흔들어 피해자를 폭행하였다.

around 02:00 on August 23, 2013, the Defendant, “2013 Godan2191,” was on the top of H-si operated by the victim G (the age of 63) before Seodaemun-gu Seoul, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, boarding as a customer, and going to the head of the victim’s head on four occasions by drinking alcohol, while serving as “the victim’s head is immediately driving.”

Accordingly, the Defendant assaulted the driver of a vehicle in operation.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police statement of E and G;

1. Application of the photographic Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act; Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act; Article 5-10(1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes; and choice of imprisonment

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Suspension of execution under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (including the fact that there is no sentence imposed on the defendant, the fact that the crime of this case is in depth against the victim G, etc.);

1. The dismissal of prosecution under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act

1. The summary of the facts charged was around J Hospital located in Eunpyeong-gu Seoul on August 23, 2013 at around 02:05, the Defendant stated that “I am, I am, I am, I am, I am, I am, I am, I am, I am, I am, I am, I am, I am, I am, I am, I am, I am, I am, I am, I am to pay the taxi fee from the victim.

On the other hand, the Defendant continued to pay taxi charges from the taxi without paying the taxi charges, and then is required by the victim who has taken the taxi according to the Defendant.

arrow