logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2013.07.03 2013노1462
상해
Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds of appeal (in fact-finding), the police officer and witness H's statement at the time of the instant case supported the credibility of the victim's statement, and the court below acquitted the facts charged in the instant case on the grounds that there is no evidence supporting the victim's statement despite the medical certificate issued on the following day of the instant case. The court below erred by misapprehending the facts, which affected the conclusion of

2. A summary of the facts charged: (a) around 22:10 on April 2012, 2012, the Defendant expressed that the victim E does not receive the agreement on the assault case occurred in the previous year from the D Association, which is located in Sinsi-si, Sinsi-si, D Association C, and expressed that the victim E would not be able to receive the agreement on the assault case that occurred in the previous year.

Accordingly, the victim was assaulted by the fluor of a fluort fluor, "Sick..................................................................

3. Determination

A. The burden of proof of criminal facts prosecuted in a criminal trial is the prosecutor, and the conviction is based on the evidence of probative value, which makes the judge feel true beyond a reasonable doubt. Thus, if there is no such evidence, the defendant is suspected of guilty, even if there is no such evidence.

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

(See Supreme Court Decision 2002Do5662 delivered on December 24, 2002, etc.). B.

Based on these legal principles, comprehensively taking into account each evidence duly adopted and investigated by the Health Team, the lower court and the first instance court as to the instant case, i.e., the following circumstances: (i) the victim stated that the victim was teared at the time, but the police officer and witness H did not match the statements of the victim and witness on the part of the injury because they did not have such a face; and (ii) H as witness of the instant case.

arrow