logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2012.11.09 2012노1842
상해
Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendant only told the victim’s desire to take a shoulder, and did not inflict an injury requiring medical treatment for about 14 days by shaking the victim’s two arms as stated in the facts charged. Meanwhile, the Defendant did not have an intention of assault or bodily injury in performing the above act. Even if the Defendant’s act is acknowledged as intentional, the Defendant’s act constitutes self-defense or legitimate act, but the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. The summary of the facts charged in this case and the summary of the judgment of the court below are as follows: “The defendant found the above facts charged on the ground that when the victim D (the victim D(74 years of age, female) passes on the street in front of the Bupyeong-gu Incheon Metropolitan Government Office of Bupyeong-gu Office of the Management of the Undong C Apartment on July 4, 201, his mother would cause her her son to ethothothize hys, thereby blocking the victim's hys and blocking the victim's hys, thereby provokinging the victim's hys for treatment for about 14 days on both sides, both sides, etc.” The court below found the defendant guilty of the facts charged in light of the evidence in its judgment.

3. The burden of proof of the facts charged in a criminal trial on the basis of the judgment below is that the prosecutor bears the burden of proof of the facts charged, and the facts charged should be proved to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt (Article 307 of the Criminal Procedure Act). Thus, if the facts charged did not reach such a degree of proof, the defendant

Even if it is not guilty, it shall be judged.

The main evidence that seems to correspond to the facts charged in this case lies in the victim's investigative agencies and the court of the court below's each statement, the injury diagnosis report, and the damaged part photograph.

1. However, the victim is an investigative agency and the court below.

arrow