beta
Text
The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.
Reasons
1. The summary of the facts charged is the defendant who is a pastor of the Ciplomatic Association, and the victim D (the age of 60) is the head of the church.
At around 12:30 on October 7, 2012, the Defendant: (a) reported the victim’s body fighting with the head of the instant non-party F and the victim D with the body of the house owner outside of the instant case in the 1st floor of the Cridge in Gwangju Northern-gu, the Defendant used his body fighting in the process of reporting the victim’s body fighting with his hand; and (b) used the victim’s chest to cut the victim’s chest over the upper floor by cutting the victim’s chest back to the upper bottom of the locker; and (c) assaulted the victim’s chest.
As a result, the Defendant inflicted an injury on the victim, such as salt dynasiums that need to be treated for about two weeks.
2. In relation to the above facts charged, the Defendant asserts that “In order to remove the victim who fights with another person at the time, fights with the other person at the church, the victim kids from the victim’s hand while going to the front of the victim, and the victim kids from the victim’s hand, and the victim does not intentionally go to the victim, and the Defendant does not interfere with the victim’s chest.” It is interpreted to the effect that the Defendant does not dispute the victim’s criminal intent.
However, in the case of this case, there are evidence and screen pictures and video recordings that had taken the present situation as objective evidence, and as a result, closely observe the screen at the speed of the above screen at the time, and as a result, the defendant, who had been pushed the victim toward the front door without considering the situation where the victim took the front door and applied for the front door, then the defendant's attitude was lowered immediately after the victim got out, and the victim was able to take the front door.
In light of the above circumstances and the attitude of testimony during the examination process of the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court and the above CCTV screen, the testimony of H, I, and J are credibility.