logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2020.05.14 2017노925
사기등
Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

The application for compensation by D&C, an applicant for compensation, shall be dismissed.

Reasons

1. The court below rejected the application for compensation filed by B, C, and D, the applicant for compensation, which is the court below's decision, and the application for compensation filed by the court below was immediately finalized since it is not possible to file an objection pursuant to Article 32 (4) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings with respect to the judgment dismissing the application

Therefore, among the judgment below, the dismissal of the above application for compensation is excluded from the scope of adjudication of this court.

2. The summary of the grounds for appeal claimed insurance money on the grounds of a large number of traffic accidents, but the symptoms of the defendant were merely caused by a sking, and the symptoms of the above traffic accidents were not new.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which acquitted this part of the facts charged is erroneous and erroneous.

3. Determination on the grounds for appeal

A. The burden of proof for the criminal facts prosecuted in a criminal trial shall be borne by the public prosecutor, and the conviction shall be based on the evidence with probative value sufficient to cause the judge to feel true that the facts charged are true beyond a reasonable doubt, and if there is no such evidence, the defendant is suspected to be guilty.

Even if there is no choice but to judge the interests of the defendant.

B. (See, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2005Do8965, Feb. 10, 2006).

First of all, the part of the traffic accident in May 5, 2013 is considered.

The circumstances presented by the lower court and the opinion of aggravation between the MI on July 2012 and May 2013 at the time of a regradical newspaper submitted by AW, which prepared a diagnosis report on the aftermath disability on February 12, 2014, is apparent.

In May 2013, MRI and the patient complained of the symptoms are consistent with the central emeric emeric emeric emeric emeric emeric emeric emeric emeric emeric emeric emul

In light of the fact that ‘the contents' are written, the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is presented at the time of the defendant's claim for insurance money on the ground of the traffic accident on May 5, 2013.

arrow