logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 전주지방법원 2013.05.24 2013노285
상해
Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is as follows: (a) the Defendant, by using flabbbage of the victim B (hereinafter “victim”), inflicted injury on the victim; and (b) there is sufficient evidence to support this; (c) the lower court acquitted the Defendant on the ground that there is no proof of the facts charged in the instant case; and (d) the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts,

2. Determination

A. On May 4, 2012, the Defendant: (a) around 10:10 on May 4, 2012, 201, at the D apartment management office in the Gunsan-si, Simsan-si, the Defendant inflicted an injury on the victim, such as catum dump, which requires approximately two weeks of treatment.

B. The lower court rendered a judgment that acquitted the Defendant on the grounds that each victim’s statement that conforms to the facts charged in the instant case is difficult to believe as it is for the reasons indicated in its reasoning, and there is no sufficient evidence to acknowledge it.

C. As evidence consistent with the facts charged in the instant case, the victim made a statement at the investigative agency and the court of original instance that corresponds to the facts charged in the instant case. The content of the statement made by the victim at the investigative agency and the court of original instance, and the victim inflicted an injury on the part of the victim by putting his head and falbbing sat, and sating it. However, the defendant consistently changed from the investigative agency to the court of original instance that there was no fact that he did not sat down the victim’s satch, and E, G, H, and H appeared to spread the victim’s satch, and only stated to the effect that the victim did not sat down the victim’s face (the investigation record 12-13, 47, 65-6 pages, and the trial record 56 pages), the victim’s above statement is not reliable.

In addition, it is not sufficient to recognize the facts charged in the instant case only with the descriptions of a medical certificate prepared by an oriental medical doctor I and other evidence submitted by a prosecutor, and there is no sufficient evidence to acknowledge it otherwise.

arrow