(영문) 대구지방법원 영덕지원 2015.07.22 2015고정42

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 대구지방법원 영덕지원 2015.07.22 2015고정42

상해

Text

The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. Around 01:10 on December 4, 2014, the summary of the facts charged in the instant case: (a) the Defendant suffered from the victim D (Nam, 38 years of age) from the Defendant’s house living room located in Ulsan-gun C Apartment 103 305 dong 305 dong 103 (the age of 47) on the part of the Defendant’s left part of the Defendant’s eye and face, thereby taking about about three weeks of rain-frame in need of three weeks of treatment; and (b) said, when the Defendant flading the victim’s left part of the snow and flading the snow, etc., the Defendant sawd the victim for about two weeks of treatment.

2. Determination

A. The gist of the defendant's assertion and the defense counsel argued that the defendant's act constitutes self-defense, although it was true that the defendant committed the victim as stated in the facts charged. However, this argues to the effect that the defendant's act constitutes self-defense because it was merely an injury upon the defendant's prior consideration.

B. Considering the following circumstances that can be recognized by the records of this case, it is reasonable to view that the Defendant’s act constitutes an act aimed at defending the current infringement of his body, which lacks illegality due to considerable grounds, or an act that is reasonable to the extent permitted by social norms as an act of passive resistance committed against the victim’s violence for himself/herself or his/her family members, and thus, constitutes an act of excluding illegality.

① The victim found the Defendant as his residence at one week from the new wall, which is a very serious view, and caused a serious horse or dispute with the Defendant. The reason why the Defendant and the victim were supposed was that the Defendant’s child was bullying.

② At the same time, the wife of the Defendant, the wife of the Defendant, and the children of the Defendant living while divinging or divinging, and the victim, when she gets off the disturbance, was broken by the wife of the Defendant, the wife of the Defendant, and his/her dependants.

3. As stated in the facts charged:

유사 판례

-대구지방법원 2016.06.17 2015노3067

-서울서부지방법원 2015.09.04 2015고정362

-의정부지방법원 2019.10.25 2019노125

-창원지방법원 2019.01.24 2018노1234

-대구지방법원 2015.04.16 2014노2002