logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2017.09.27 2017고정1415
상해
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 700,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On March 12, 2017, the Defendant: (a) collected in the valley-dong 516-9, Suwon-si, Suwon-si, Suwon-si on March 12, 2017.

In the vicinity of the shooting distance, the victim C, who is a taxi passenger, walked the victim's bridge and boomed the victim's bridge to the floor, and suffered injury such as a boom and a booming 3 weeks in need of medical treatment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Partial statement of the witness C;

1. A medical certificate of injury (an examination record No. 19);

1. The defendant and his defense counsel asserted that the defendant did not inflict any injury on the victim. However, according to each evidence of the judgment, the defendant she walked the victim's bridge at the time and opened it on the floor (the image of around 06:40:50 among the black stuff CD in the judgment), the victim exceeded the right side of the body at the time, the victim complained of the police officer dispatched (06:48:50) immediately after the case, and the victim complained of the part inside the body at the time. According to the photographs taken at the time, the fact that the victim's right side side was red, and the victim visited the hospital on the day of the case, and visited the hospital at the time of the case to the effect that "the victim was diagnosed with 3 weeks on the side of the front side and on the side of the side of the body of the victim," and the victim did not accept the fact that the victim suffered any injury on the part of the victim's inside the immediately preceding taxi and the defendant's defense counsel's assertion that he did not have any special face the victim.

[Application of Acts and subordinate statutes]

1. Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the relevant criminal facts and Article 257 (Selection of Penalty) of the Criminal Act;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. The defendant and his defense counsel asserted that the defendant's act constitutes legitimate defense, but based on each evidence of the ruling, although the defendant's act is alleged to the effect that it constitutes legitimate defense.

arrow