logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 2016.10.26 2016노338
과실치상
Text

1. The judgment below is reversed.

2. The defendant is not guilty; 3. The defendant shall notify the defendant of the summary of the judgment.

Reasons

1. Although it is difficult to recognize the credibility of the victim's statement in the summary of the grounds for appeal, the facts charged in this case constitute a case where there is no proof of crime, the lower court convicted the Defendant.

2. Determination

A. The Defendant in the facts charged in the instant case is operating “D cafeteria” in Kimhae-si, and from March 2014, the Defendant is a person who from around March 2014, raises a dog (in January 2014, Huskki Ski Huat) at the above cafeteria.

At around 19:00 on October 5, 2014, when putting a dog, the line should be cut, and the line should be put to the victim E (ma, South and 65 years old) who was carrying the front dog of the above restaurant, and the victim E (ma, South and 65 years old) who was tryed to go beyond the floor and suffered a 12-day-day-day-time-free-free-free-free-free-free-free-free-free-free-free-free-free-free-free-free-free-free-free-free-free-free-free-free-free-

B. The lower court determined that the facts charged in the instant case are reliable in light of the circumstances where the victim made a relatively consistent statement about the facts of damage and the victim knew of the fact that he/she was the Defendant’s ownership, and found the Defendant guilty by appropriately correcting the facts charged in the instant case to the extent that it does not have any substantial disadvantage in exercising the Defendant’s right

The facts charged of this case revised by the lower court without the amendment of the indictment by the prosecutor are as follows: “Defendant: (a) was a person operating a cafeteria in Kimhae-si; and (b) from March 2014, the victim was raised at the above cafeteria in the above cafeteria, from January 1, 2014, and thus, (c) was negligent in neglecting his duty of care to prevent harm to other people, such as binding down the dog on the dog, etc.; and (d) on October 5, 2014, the victim, who was going through the above cafeteria around 19:00, went to the victim E (the son and 65 years old) (the son and 65 years old) who was trying to escape from the cafeteria, thereby allowing the victim to take medical treatment for 12 weeks.

arrow