(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2014.07.18 2014고정976

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) 서울동부지방법원 2014.07.18 2014고정976

상해

Text

A defendant shall be punished by a fine of 500,000 won.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On March 24, 2013, the Defendant: (a) around 13:00, the Victim C (73 years of age) located in Songpa-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government opened the Defendant’s house in a garden in Songpa-gu, and (b) laid the knite from the Defendant’s house, and (c) taken one time as a drinking to the victim’s entrance, and the left side of the knite.

In this way, the defendant was suffering from a fluoral autopsy where the number of days of treatment can not be known to the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of each police suspect against the defendant or C;

1. C’s statement;

1. An investigation report (verification of the degree of injury, etc.);

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes governing bodily injuries;

1. Relevant Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts, the choice of a fine, and the choice of a fine;

1. Articles 70 and 69(2) of the former Criminal Act (amended by Act No. 12575, May 14, 2014).

1. The Defendant asserts to the effect that the Defendant’s act constitutes self-defense or legitimate act by making a statement to the effect that the Defendant’s act constitutes self-defense on the part of the defense vehicle by stating that the victim was at the time of the victim as stated in the facts charged on the part of the defense vehicle, by first intending to drink the Defendant’s desire, such as drinking at the bar, etc.

However, it is difficult to view that the act of attack and defense was conducted through a series of acts of attack and defense between the persons who fight in the same manner, and the act of attack was at the same time, and thus, the act of attack is in the nature of both parties, and thus, constitutes “self-defense” or “political act” for defense. According to the evidence of each judgment, the defendant and the victim were satisfing with each other, and during that process, they can be recognized that the defendant inflicted an injury upon the victim when satisfing the victim. Since such act of the defendant goes beyond the mere defense, it cannot be viewed as self-defense or legitimate act, the above assertion is rejected

참조조문

유사 판례

-부산지방법원 2014.07.25 2014고정1305

-부산지방법원 2014.10.31 2014고정2754

-서울동부지방법원 2014.04.08 2014고정165

-의정부지방법원 2020.05.14 2019고정1620

-서울동부지방법원 2014.04.25 2013고정2963