logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 마산지원 2012.11.14 2012고합79
특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(운전자폭행등)
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,000,000.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

At around 19:00 on February 19, 2012, the Defendant: (a) boarded the victim E (56 years of age) as a guest in the near the D Middle School located in Changwon-si, Masiwon-si; (b) while the said taxi is driving ahead of the Masan Meteorological Team located in the Changwon-si, the Defendant asked the victim to see whether he would receive taxi expenses; (c) sees the victim’s speech that he would receive taxi expenses from the Defendant’s daily activities, and sees the victim’s desire to see that “I would have received from the Defendant’s daily activities, and I would have received from the said taxi, I would like to see that I would have received from the Defendant’s daily activities,” and assault the driver of the said taxi at the time of driving the back part of the victim’s shoulder while driving the said taxi.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of witness E;

1. The part of the statement E among the interrogation protocol of the police against the defendant (second interrogation)

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on police statement to E;

1. Article 5-10 (1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes and the Selection of Punishment for Crimes;

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The assertion by the defendant and his/her defense counsel under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act;

1. The summary of the argument is that the victim did not assault the victim when he drives a taxi, and that the victim had already received the taxi fee from the Defendant after having arrived at the destination, and thus, he did not claim again the taxi fee even after having already received the taxi fee from the Defendant.

2. The following circumstances acknowledged by the aforementioned macroscopic evidence, namely, from the police to the court of law, the victim consistently left the taxi with the Defendant, she gets off the taxi with the Defendant, she gets off the taxi due to the string of the Masan Meteorological Team, and her shoulder part was shakeed, and her back head was scoped, and the Defendant was in the Defendant’s way of driving and communicating with the Defendant.

arrow