logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2014.02.13 2013고정2448
상해
Text

Defendant

A shall be punished by a fine for negligence of KRW 1,000,000, and by a fine of KRW 500,000.

The above fines are imposed by the Defendants.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. Defendant A around 12:50 on June 8, 2013, on the ground that there was a brush with the victim B during the calculation of goods within the Fransh area E, Defendant A, as a trial, carried the right shoulder of the victim’s right-hand shoulder on one occasion, carried the victim’s 21-day right-hand shoulder, and applied the victim’s b1-day right-hand shoulder and salt to the right-hand shoulder.

2. Defendant B set up against the above date, time, place, and set up against the right-hand ice on the left-hand side of the victim A, which requires treatment for about seven days of transfer to the victim.

Summary of Evidence

[Defendant A]

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of the witness B;

1. The suspect interrogation protocol of the police as to B;

1. A written statement prepared B;

1. An injury diagnosis certificate (B);

1. Video CDs (Defendant B);

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A suspect interrogation protocol of the police officer;

1. A written statement;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of the Medical Certificate of Injury (A)

1. Relevant Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts, the choice of a fine, and the choice of a fine;

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. Of the Defendant B and the defense counsel’s assertion on the claim of the Defendant B and the defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, it appears that the Defendant B’s crime of this case constitutes self-defense or legitimate act. As such, in full view of all the details of the crime of this case acknowledged by the evidence of the judgment, the Defendant B’s act cannot be deemed as an act with considerable grounds for defending the current infringement of the legal interests of the Defendant B, or an act that does not go against social rules.

Therefore, the above argument is without merit.

arrow