logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2015.08.27 2015고단2636
폭력행위등처벌에관한법률위반(집단ㆍ흉기등상해)
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On November 25, 2011, the Defendant was sentenced to three years of imprisonment with prison labor for murder, attempted murder, etc. at the Daegu High Court, and completed the execution of the said punishment on December 14, 2012.

At around 22:00 on May 16, 2015, the Defendant, while drinking alcohol with the victim I (inn, 41 years of age) and I, who had been under the influence of alcohol, was the victim on the ground that the victim refused to do so, was in contact with the beer, which is a dangerous object on the table, and had the beer’s disease faced with the victim at the time of being in contact with the beer, which was in danger on the table of the table, and caused the victim to suffer the injury that the victim was under the teared volume of 30 meters in the number of days of treatment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Partial statement of a witness I;

1. The written statement of the defendant;

1. Statement of the police statement to I;

1. Photographs of each victim;

1. Diagnosis and treatment sets (Provided, That the part on the award “as they face with glusium” is excluded);

1. Investigative reports;

1. Before judgment: Criminal history records, inquiry reports, investigation reports (Attachment to judgments, etc.), and the defendant set a beer's disease on the tables, and the strike was on the head of the victim's body, and the defendant did not have any other disease, and the criminal facts of the judgment are denied;

In this regard, the court reversed the statement that the defendant was suffering from the injury because the victim was faced with the victim at the police station, and that the victim was faced with the head at the bar of the defendant in telephone conversations with the prosecutorial police officer, and that the defendant was faced with the head at the bar of the defendant in the telephone conversation with the prosecutorial police officer.

However, the circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court, that is, the victim was living together with the defendant and sought a preference against the defendant, and the victim was living together with the defendant.

arrow