(영문) 수원지방법원 2017.04.20 2016노4470 | 리걸엔진

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 수원지방법원 2017.04.20 2016노4470

폭행

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact, the Defendant merely put the victim’s arms in a multilateral and defensive manner while harming the Defendant’s mother G, who is the Defendant’s mother, and did not assault the victim’s shoulder as indicated in the instant facts charged.

Nevertheless, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to the facts charged of this case.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (an amount of KRW 500,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is that the building owner and the victim C (40 taxes, women) live in the same building as the tenant.

The defendant had a complaint against the victim on the ground that the victim did not pay electricity and cleaning expenses for the joint use of the building.

On September 23, 2015, the Defendant, at the entrance of the building in Ansan-si, 19:50 on September 23, 2015, committed assault by pushing the victim's shoulder for the aforementioned reasons.

2) The lower court determined that: (a) stated in an investigative agency that the part concerning the part concerning the part of the assault was somewhat inconsistent by stating that “the Defendant was pushed down with the Defendant’s arm’s length”; (b) “the Defendant was pushed down with the victim’s right shoulder”; and (c) “the Defendant was pushed down with the victim’s left shoulder”; (d) but, at the police station, stated that “the Defendant was pushed down with the Defendant’s arm’s length” on the part of the assault was erroneous that “the Defendant was pushed down with the Defendant’s arm’s length.”

In light of the victim's attitude of statement at the court below, the victim's explanation is justified in light of the victim's attitude of statement at the court below. It is explained that this court explained that the defendant's statement was made as above, i.e., whether the defendant is protruding so as to be protruding or protruding so as to be protruding, or not, at the time of this court.

In addition to the cases of violence, the victim's statements are consistent.

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 안산지원 2016.06.30 2016고정217

-서울북부지방법원 2020.08.21 2020노1018

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.07.13 2016고단9054

-서울남부지방법원 2021.04.07 2020고단3916

-부산지방법원 2020.11.18 2020고정955