logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2014.11.21 2014고정2678
과실치상
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 300,000.

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

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is the president of the division of the Center B and the victim C (54 years of age) is the representative of the Service Center.

around 09:00 on July 7, 2014, the Defendant: (a) at the “B Center in Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D2 floor; (b) in order to prevent the victim from removing a trade union signboard (40cm x 30cm x 30cm) attached to the customer center’s wall by hand, the Defendant 4 balance of the victim’s left hand (herb) was cut between the front board and the wall; and (c) caused the victim to injure the victim’s 4 balance of the left hand and the wall.

Summary of Evidence

1. A protocol concerning the examination of partial police officers of the accused;

1. Statement of the police statement regarding C;

1. Investigation report (investigation, including the victim's injury diagnosis report and CD attachment);

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes on injuries, CCTV video CDs;

1. Relevant Article of the Criminal Act and Article 266 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. As to the Defendant’s assertion under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, the Defendant alleged that the victim’s attempt to remove the signboard attached to the office wall without permission at the time of the instant case constituted self-defense or legitimate act, and thus, according to the records, there is no agreement between the labor union side and the victim on the issue of designating the office of the labor union. The instant trade union’s standing position is acknowledged to have been unilaterally established on the part of the labor union. Under the above circumstances, the Defendant’s act as stated in the instant facts charged cannot be deemed as self-defense or legitimate act, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it, and the Defendant’s assertion is not acceptable.

arrow