logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 고양지원 2014.10.02 2014고단1108
특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(운전자폭행등)
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for up to six months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

Criminal facts

On May 12, 2014, around 22:10, the Defendant: (a) boarded a taxi driven by the victim C (Einam and 52 years of age) in front of the apartment complex of the 1st apartment complex of the Goyang-gu, Seoyang-gu, Seoyang-gu, Seoyang-gu; (b) did not go to the chief of the steering force; and (c) was in the middle of the Seoul red-dong, the destination of which was scheduled, the Defendant committed an assault by the victim on two occasions, taking the time fee to the victim while driving the taxi, and assaulting the victim on two occasions.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

2. Application of the police protocol protocol law to C

1. Relevant provisions of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes and Article 5-10 (1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes concerning the crime;

2. The grounds for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act are the elements for sentencing unfavorable to the defendant in light of the fact that the crime of this case on the grounds of suspended sentence under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act may cause secondary damage, such as traffic accidents, etc.

On the other hand, the fact that the defendant led to the confession of the facts charged in this case and reflects his mistake, that the victim does not want punishment against the defendant by mutual consent with the victim, and that the defendant supported the son who was physically disabled and divorced after the divorce, is a factor for sentencing favorable to the defendant.

Furthermore, the sentencing data, such as the age, character and behavior, and environment of the defendant, were considered equally.

arrow