logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 서부지원 2019.01.15 2017고정638
상해
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,000,000.

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

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant and B(52) together serve as a bath manager in the “D” located in the Daegu-gu Incheon Metropolitan City C.

On November 27, 2016, the Defendant: (a) around 16:30 on the 4th floor of the above “D”, and (b) on the ground that the victim B saw boomed during working hours, the Defendant told the victim, “I am to drink boom during the working hours,” and (c) caused the victim’s injury, such as spawd and spathing, which was caused by the victim’s her hand, by taking one-time buck with the victim’s her hand, by taking about two weeks into account the victim’s buck.

Summary of Evidence

1. Legal statement of the witness B;

1. A protocol of examination of part of the prosecution concerning B;

1. Each protocol of interrogation of some police officers as to B;

1. A written petition;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of the injury diagnosis certificate (record No. 16 pages);

1. Relevant Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts, the choice of a fine, and the choice of a fine;

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

1. The defendant and his/her defense counsel asserts that there is no fact that the defendant had been her boomed by the victim, in the judgment of the defendant and his/her defense counsel regarding the claim of the provisional payment order.

The victim, from the investigative agency to the court, statements that the defendant continued to have been in the same way against the defendant.

In addition, the name of the injured person on the medical certificate of injury issued by the victim is "damage to the spambry in the inside of the inside and the inside of the mouth" and the time when the diagnosis was conducted or the injury was caused by the victim's above statement is supported.

On the other hand, on December 2, 2016, the victim stated that "(the defendant) at the time when he/she was investigated as a suspect by the police first on December 2, 2016, he/she was "(the defendant) at the time when he/she was investigated as a suspect (the 4th, the record No. 20th, the record), and the police officer against the defendant and the victim, even at the time when he/she was investigated as a suspect by the police on December 2, 2016 (the 4th, the record No. 20th, the record)."

arrow