logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 부천지원 2017.01.25 2016고단3114
상해
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On October 6, 2016, the Defendant inflicted injury on the victim C (46 years of age) who was a pro-friendly fluorous victim C (46 years of age) who was fluorous fluor B, and was fluorous and bad in this house. On October 6, 2016, the Defendant sawd the victim’s face, head, and shoulder at a drinking time, and fluord the victim’s head, fluor, and fluor, which require treatment for about 57 days.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement in each police statement made against D or C;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes written diagnosis of injury;

1. Relevant Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, Article 59 of the Act on the Observation, etc. of Protection, etc. of Social Service Order [the scope of recommendation] The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the same Act and Article 59 of the same Act [the scope of recommendation] shall be determined by comprehensively taking into account the following circumstances: (a) the basic area (4th to one year and six months) / [the person who has been specially mitigated] / [including a serious effort to recover from damage] / [the sentence] / [the decision of sentence] : The defendant led to the confession of the crime of this case and his mistake; (b) the victim and the defendant have not yet reached an agreement; and (c) there is no record of punishment exceeding the fine; (d) the crime of this case was committed in excess of the quality of the crime by using excessive violence on the ground of limited time; and (e) the defendant was not familiar with the punishment of this case even after having already been punished for the same kind of crime; and (d) the crime of this case and its recommendation and its degree of injury thereby within the sentencing guidelines under Article 51.

arrow