(영문) 수원지방법원 안산지원 2013.04.30 2012고정1976

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) 수원지방법원 안산지원 2013.04.30 2012고정1976

폭력행위등처벌에관한법률위반(공동폭행)

Text

The sentence of punishment shall be suspended against the Defendants.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

At around 18:00 on July 28, 2012, the Defendants were married couple, and around 18:00, at the house of the victim E (the 40-year-old 40-year-old 402) of the D Apartment 204-dong 402 (the son and the son, the son, “I would not interfere with our family issues,” and the son, the son, the son, the son, the son, the son, and the son, the son, the son, the son, the son, and the son, the son, the son, the son, the son, the son, and the son, the son.

Summary of Evidence

1. The Defendants’ partial statements in the second trial records;

1. Each legal statement of witness E and F;

1. Partial statement of witness G;

1. Some police interrogation protocol against the Defendants

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on police statement to E;

1. Relevant Article 2 (2) and (1) 1 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act and Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act (the point of joint assault and the selection of fines) shall apply to the Defendants of the relevant criminal facts and the choice of punishment;

1. Defendants to be suspended from sentence: Fine of 300,000 won; and

1. Articles 70 and 69(2) of the Criminal Act (50,000 won per day) of the Criminal Act for the inducement of a workhouse;

1. As to the Defendants and their defense counsel’s assertion under Article 59(1) of the Criminal Act of the suspended sentence, the Defendants and their defense counsel asserted that at the time of the instant case, the Defendants got the shoulder of the victim, but they constitute an act of emergency evacuation or legitimate act, since the Defendants and their defense counsel caused the occurrence of the victim’s scam, and thus, the Defendants were acquitted.

In full view of the above evidence, although the victim interested at the time of the instant case, it did not incidental or generate any object. In light of these circumstances, the Defendants’ act does not constitute an emergency evacuation or a legitimate act, and thus, the Defendants and the defense counsel’ assertion is without merit.

Defendant A is between the victim and the victim, and Defendant B is the defendant.

참조조문

-폭력행위 등 처벌에 관한 법률 제2조 제2항

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 2018.12.13 2018고정1544

-서울동부지방법원 2014.11.14 2014고정1166

-인천지방법원 2012.12.05 2012노2147

-서울서부지방법원 2017.10.26 2017고정430

-수원지방법원 2016.06.02 2016고정56