logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 목포지원 2016.09.23 2016고정176
재물손괴
Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. On November 18, 2015, the Defendant: (a) on the front side of the C apartment building D at a wooden city around 21:21 on November 18, 2015, reported that the E victim F car car was set off in front of the C apartment building building D and parked illegally; and (b) on the part of the victim, the Defendant damaged the property owned by the victim equivalent to KRW 143,000 at the market price, such as the damage of two knife knife and one knife knife knife.

2. Determination

A. As to the above facts charged, the Defendant asserts that there is no fact that F’s car driving seat is fleeped.

B. Therefore, in light of the following facts and circumstances, the evidence corresponding to the facts charged in the instant case is included in the statement at the police station made by the F, the statement made by the F in this court, a quotation, and the video of the video CDs in this court. However, in light of the following facts and circumstances, which can be recognized by this court based on the evidence duly adopted and investigated, the facts charged were proved by evidence of probative value beyond a reasonable doubt.

subsection (b) of this section.

1) At the time of the police questioning the situation immediately before the Defendant’s own car driving seat, F stated that “the first one out of the two tracess that can be seen from the images of the above black booms image CDs occurs, and the second one out of the two strings is generated by the Defendant’s opening of the car driving seat,” and in this court, the first strings occur in the situation where the Defendant attempted to get off, and the second strings stated that “the first strings occur in the situation where the Defendant attempted to get off, and the second strings occur in the situation where the above car driving seat is opened to the extent of half of the above car driving seat, and the contents of each of the above statements conflict with each other.”

2) The two tracess that can be seen from the video of the above black CDs are not clear about the degree of difference, and the said quotation is written in an industrial company where F works.

3) Even if the Defendant was a driver’s seat in F’s car.

arrow