logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 전주지방법원 2014.01.22 2013고정798
폭력행위등처벌에관한법률위반(공동폭행)
Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. At around 02:30 on April 26, 2013, the Defendant and C in the facts charged: (a) the “E” main store located in Yansan-si (hereinafter “E”); (b) the victim F (hereinafter “instant business”) continued to sing and yield over time at the outlet inside the establishment of the instant business; (c) the Defendant sounded the victim “10,000 square meters”; and (d) deducted the part cited by the victim into the victim’s face; and (c) the Defendant, in combination, took the part of the victim’s left chest by hand over the victim’s hand.

Accordingly, the defendant and C jointly assaulted the victim.

2. There is a victim’s statement (legal statement and police statement) as evidence to acknowledge the facts charged of the instant case.

However, the Defendant asserts that, while drunk victims, when they singing in the instant business place, they sing down the victim by doing acts such as singing the micros by cutting the micros and singing the singing at the instant business place, the Defendant did not sing down the victim on the spot.

Since the police investigation, the defendant consistently made the above arguments. The witness G operating the business of this case has consistently followed, and the victim took the part in the defendant's singing. However, although the victim did not sing the sing and singing the sing the singing, the victim did not sing down the sing and sing down the singing, and the victim stated that there was a singing out of the above singing point of view. The above witness was deemed to have made a statement about this case from a relatively objective point of view. The co-defendant was determined to have been a relatively objective point of view, and C was a co-defendant at an investigative agency recognized the fact that sing the victim was sing down to the victim, and stated that the defendant was sing down the victim. However, considering the fact that the victim did not make any statement about the victim's getting out of the singing point of view, the defendant was the victim as described in

arrow