(영문) 광주지방법원 2014.12.19 2014고단2114

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 광주지방법원 2014.12.19 2014고단2114

상해

Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. At around 02:30 on March 2, 2014, the Defendant injured the victim E (year 44) and the victim E (age 4) in the south-gu Seoul metropolitan area due to parking problems, the Defendant suffered injury, such as the bones of bones, etc. requiring treatment for about 21 days by drinking the victim’s face at one time.

2. Direct evidence corresponding to the facts charged in the instant case is that the victim’s investigative agency and legal statement are abundant.

However, in light of the following circumstances recognized in the record, it is difficult to eliminate the possibility that the victim is unable to properly memory the background of the injury, such as admitting a person who is not the defendant as the defendant.

Therefore, the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, including the victim’s statement, is insufficient to readily conclude that the Defendant inflicted an injury on the victim as above, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

The site of this case was the inside of the alleys without street lamps, and it was very deep night at the time.

Moreover, according to the victim's statement, at the time, the victim was in a state of brue with the degree of 2 soldiers who are in excess of the main amount, and the fact that the victim was in a singing room before arrival at the site was considerably unsatisfy and immediately after the arrival at the site was unable to be prepared in writing.

B. The victim stated at the first district unit that “The front side of the D in C was satisfyed, and the neighbor fleded to unsatisfy,” but the police station stated to the effect that “the head of the Gu and the defendant went to his house immediately after coming to his house,” the victim stated to the effect that “the head of the Gu and the defendant went to his house,” and that “the head of the Gu and the defendant went to his house,” while having a dispute with the defendant, I am to be satisfy and satisfy in the prosecutors’ office and this court.

The defendant was facing the defendant immediately before this year.

It was not considered that the defendant tried to see.

2.3

유사 판례

-서울고등법원 2013.02.14 2012노3850

-부산지방법원 서부지원 2017.10.26 2017고합26

-광주지방법원 2019.09.19 2019노502

-의정부지방법원 2016.04.20 2015고단4974

-수원지방법원 안산지원 2015.09.22 2015고정973