beta
Text
The defendant shall be innocent.
Reasons
1. On April 4, 201, the Defendant: (a) around 07:15, at the Jung-gu Daejeon apartment parking lot of Daejeon, the Defendant: (b) sold goods in a passenger car in order to work for D, a resident of the said apartment; (c) the Defendant: (d) parked and unloaded a freight 1 ton of the EF vehicle owned by the Defendant; and (d) opened the car driver’s seat immediately next to the car driver’s seat on which the said D was loaded, and (d) carried out an obscene act openly harming the Defendant’s self-defense by taking the sexual organ out.
2. Determination:
A. The instant case is one of the following: (a) the family members of the D (hereinafter “victim”) and the victim had been witnessed several times in the area near Daejeon-gu, Daejeon-gu, where the victim’s residence was located even after the date and time of committing the crime in which the Defendant was committed; and (b) the investigation was initiated when checking the vehicle number on June 18, 201 and reporting to the police.
B. According to each description of F District Work Place and the status of the receipt and handling of the incident (the investigation record 14,15 pages), it is confirmed that the victim’s convict G was accurately identified and reported the number of the vehicle on the F District Unit E on June 1, 2011. After that, the police summoned the vehicle of the defendant and the defendant for questioning the victim’s family members and the victim’s family members, the victim’s family members and the victim’s family members made a statement that the person who observed the defendant at the time of the commission of the crime and the appearance of the defendant were insufficient and that the appearance of the Poter vehicle and the Poter vehicle which had been observed are the same as the appearance of the defendant’s Poter vehicle at the time of the commission of the crime. Accordingly, the investigative agency determined the defendant as the criminal of the crime in this case and caused prosecution.
C. On June 1, 2011, the Defendant asserted that there is no inter-faction in the vicinity of the victim’s residence, where the victim’s family appeared to witness the Defendant’s spoke vehicle while denying the crime.
Albaba, the defendant asserts, is as follows:
(1) The Defendant is to H at the time of discussion.