(영문) 수원지방법원 평택지원 2021.01.07 2019고단2171

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) 수원지방법원 평택지원 2021.01.07 2019고단2171

상해

Text

[Defendant A] The defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 500,000.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. On January 29, 2019, Defendant A assaulted the victim B (56 years old) with the victim B (56 years old) who resisted due to rent at the office of the Deputy Commissioner of Pyeongtaek-si (13:55 on January 29, 2019, and fighted with the victim by having his body fighting closely with the victim.

Defendant

A has been prosecuted due to the crime of injury, but A acknowledges the guilty of the crime of assault included in the facts charged to the extent that the identity of the facts charged is recognized and it does not interfere with the defendant's exercise of his/her right to defense, and judged the acquittal on some of the facts charged

2. The Defendant, as mentioned in paragraph (1) at the time, at the place specified in paragraph (1), committed assault against the victim, such as spiting, spiting, spiting, spiting, spiting, spiting the flap with the face, pushing the body with the victim, and fighting with the victim.

Summary of Evidence

Judgment on the Defendants’ and defense counsel’ assertion of the Defendants’ respective legal statements E and F as a result of the video appraisal of each of their respective legal statements

1. The assertion;

A. Defendant A did not exercise violence against the victim B, and argued that there was a certain physical contact between the Defendant and the victim at the time, which constitutes a defensive act.

B. Defendant B did not spit the victim A’s breath or spit the victim’s face.

The argument is asserted.

2. The judgment is based on the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court.

First of all, it is difficult to grasp the detailed contents and processes of the force between the Defendants on the basis of the CCTV images (Evidence No. 35 No. 5) submitted in this case, which were submitted in this case, due to the distance of shooting, angle, and question. However, it can be confirmed that the body of the Defendants was sealed by the Defendants, and that the body of the Defendants was fighting due to considerable strength.

유사 판례

-부산지방법원 동부지원 2013.04.08 2012고정1425

-청주지방법원 충주지원 2013.01.09 2012고정244

-창원지방법원 2016.08.31 2016고정507

-서울남부지방법원 2016.09.26 2016고단853

-의정부지방법원 고양지원 2014.11.28 2014고정359