logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 부천지원 2017.02.28 2016고정1302
재물손괴
Text

The defendant is innocent. The summary of this judgment shall be notified publicly.

Reasons

1. The summary of the facts charged: (a) around August 27, 2016, the Defendant: (b) around 07:20, Seocheon City C Building 921; (c) during the dispute with pets D; (d) during the dispute with pets victim D; (c) the Defendant purchased and installed in the said victim’s room prior to the day, thereby making the said TV available for drinking; and (d) damaged the said TV for repair costs.

2. In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined in this Court, the evidence presented in this case alone is sufficiently proven that the said TV was owned by others, i.e., the victim’s sole ownership, or the Defendant’s joint ownership.

It does not appear.

Thus, this part of the facts charged constitutes a case without proof of crime, and thus, the acquittal is pronounced in accordance with the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the summary of the judgment of innocence is publicly announced in accordance with Article 58(2) of the Criminal Act.

At the time, the Defendant agreed to live together with the victim 10 days prior to the 10th day prior to the death of the victim, and moved to the above room by little of the Defendant’s animal, but did not have a relation of legal divorce or de facto marriage with the victim or with the living together for a long time.

The said TV has been used by the injured party in the above room.

As TV is broken out, the defendant has settled the full purchase price in order to view TV in the above room.

The victim also appears as a witness in this Court and the above TV is owned by the defendant, so the defendant shall not use it.

If the victim is considered to be unable to use, the victim was considered to be unable.

was stated.

In light of the above circumstances, the Defendant: (a) donated the said TV to the victim; (b) or (c) the said TV was damaged by the Defendant solely on the ground that the place where the TV was installed was set up was set up by the victim’s protection; or (d) purchased from the Internet shopping mall where only the said TV was set up by the victim.

arrow