logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 청주지방법원 2016.11.18 2016노549
재물손괴
Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. According to CCTV images submitted by the prosecutor of the gist of the grounds for appeal, the court below erred by misapprehending the fact that the defendant committed the crime of this case, and thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment, considering the following: (a) it is acknowledged that the defendant was protruding about about 100,000,00 after the passage of the victim's vehicle parked in the underground parking lot; and (b) it is difficult to deem that a third party other than the defendant entered the above place at the time of the case; and (c) the defendant appears to have avoided the answer to the purport that the police would not actively deny the crime; and (d) it is sufficiently recognized that the defendant committed the crime of this case.

2. Determination

A. On October 9, 2015, the summary of the facts charged in the instant case: (a) around 21:58, the Defendant destroyed the instant vehicle to repair cost of KRW 609,840,00, on the ground that, at the Cheongju-si, Cheongju-si, Cheongju-si, C Apartment-gu, 82 underground parking lots, the Ecopied vehicle owned D (hereinafter “instant vehicle”) is not parked normally; and (b) the instant vehicle was placed in a glass window for driving seat, and the cement brick was cut off.

B. The Defendant denied the crime to the effect that “The time and place indicated in the facts charged in the instant case are smaller than the surrounding area of the instant vehicle, but there was no disturbance and cement brick on the instant vehicle at the time, and there was no damage therefrom.”

The lower court acquitted the Defendant of the instant charges on the grounds of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated:

The burden of proof for the facts charged in a criminal trial is to be borne by a public prosecutor, and the conviction is to be based on evidence with probative value that makes the judge feel true beyond a reasonable doubt, so such evidence is to be proven.

arrow