logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 전주지방법원 2013.08.21 2013고정231
상해
Text

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

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won shall be one day.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. On August 24, 2012, around 07:30 on August 24, 2012, the Defendant found the victim’s house of Seo-jin-gu C Apartment 815 on the ground that the victim was not entitled to telephone, and 5-6 times the lower part of the table was 5-6 times, and 5-6 times the left side bucks and caused the victim to take approximately two weeks of treatment due to the right wharf.

2.(a)

On August 28, 2012, the Defendant: (a) around 21:20 on August 28, 2012, at the same place as Paragraph (1), the victim E, who is a partner of D, “whether he is impule, dye and dye and dye it,” and dyee the epic, and dye the epic, and dye the epic dye and dye on the ship, and divided the epics over the floor, and caused the epic dye to undergo approximately two-

B. The defendant 2-A

When the defendant takes the timber of the victim E at the same time and at a place as in the same time as in the same paragraph, the victim F suffered injury, “The victim F made the victim’s back of the F, twice the back of the back of the f, twice the back of the back of the back of the f, twice the back of the back of the back of the f with the hand that the f, twice the back of the back of the back of the f, once the right side of the back of the f, and twice the face of the f, and caused the F to suffer injury, such as chests, which requires approximately two weeks of treatment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of D, E, F, and G;

1. Each written diagnosis;

1. As to the claim of the Defendant and the defense counsel regarding the investigation report (14-23 pages of investigation records) (14-23 pages), the Defendant and the defense counsel asserted that with regard to paragraph 1 of the judgment, the Defendant did not have any injury to the victim D, and related to paragraph 2 of the judgment, the Defendant was merely a passive defense act to escape from unfair infringement.

When comprehensively taking into account the following, the victims' statements in this court and in the investigative agency are consistent and inconsistent, and the photograph taken on the day of the incident clearly shows the traces of the victims' injuries.

arrow