logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2018.01.15 2017고단4153
상해등
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

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

Reasons

In light of the above legal principles, the lower court’s judgment against the Defendant was justifiable and acceptable. In so doing, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal principles as to the Plaintiff’s ground of appeal, as otherwise alleged in the ground of appeal, contrary to what is alleged in the ground of appeal.

1. On August 3, 2017, the injured Defendant: (a) around 00:30, Jinju-si E, 3** 11 at the residence located in the same 11st floor, and (b) when the injured Defendant was able to look at D who did not have a school, and (c) the injured Defendant was able to look at the victim’s chest and the part and the part of the victim’s chest and the part of the victim’s chest and the part of the knife, which were several times, and the number of days of treatment cannot be known to the victim.

2. Damage to property;

A. On August 3, 2017, at around 02:00, the Defendant destroyed the front glass of the said vehicle to cover KRW 280,060,060, by placing D’s book door door outside of its windows for the foregoing reason, which was parked in the parking lot, by falling off the front glass of the Victim F, the victim F, who was parked in the parking lot.

B. On August 3, 2017, at around 02:30 around 02:30, the Defendant: (a) deducted a cell phone owned by the victim D for the foregoing reasons; (b) cut off the cell phone on the floor so that repair costs can be caused; and (c) laid off photographs and glass owned by the victim C and the victim C on the floor so that repair costs can be destroyed, respectively.

3. 공무집행 방해 피고인은 2017. 8. 3. 03:35 경 제 1 항 기재 장소에서, ‘ 아내를 격리해 달라’ 는 취지로 C이 한 112 신고를 받고 현장에 출동한 진주 경찰서 H 지구대 소속 경찰공무원 경위 I 및 순경 J가 경찰공무원들의 앞에서 휴대폰을 손에 들고 C을 때리는 피고인을 현행범으로 체포하려 하자, 욕설을 하면서 위 I의 다리를 2회 걷어찼다.

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with legitimate execution of duties concerning the arrest of police officers in the act of committing a crime.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each police statement made against C, I, J, and D;

1. A written statement;

1. Photographs photographs of damaged vehicles;

1.Each.

arrow