logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2017.10.26 2017노397
상해
Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The sentence of sentence shall be suspended for the defendant.

Reasons

1. Even though the defendant had inflicted an injury on the victim, the judgment of the court below acquitted the victim of the violation.

2. Determination

A. The prosecutor of the Amendments to Bill of Indictment: (a) the facts charged by the court below as the primary facts charged; and (b) the court applied for the Amendments to Bill of Indictment with the contents that add the facts charged of assault to the ancillary facts charged; and (c) this court permitted it and changed the subject of the trial; (d) as seen later, the court below found the Defendant guilty of the ancillary facts charged; and (e) therefore, the part of the court below’

Despite such reasons for ex officio destruction, the argument that the prosecutor's primary facts of the indictment is still subject to the judgment of this court.

B. On August 4, 2015, around 19:00 on August 4, 2015, the primary facts charged were reported by the victim E (the age of 51) (the age of 51) who was under conflict with the Defendant due to the obligation relationship, such as failing to repay, etc., at around June 2015, around 3 million won in front of the “D” located in Gwangjin-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City, but was aware that the Defendant was conducting an illegal procedure in the beauty room operated by the Defendant.

“The victim’s head and clothes of the victim were fluored by hand, and fluoring the victim’s head and clothes, was fluored by drinking, and fluoring the victim’s bucks that go beyond the floor, thereby causing injury to the victim in need of approximately two weeks’s treatment.

2) The lower court and the lower court’s determination as to the deliberation of the parties are difficult to believe that the part, among the statements made by the victim and the statements made by F, the spouse in de facto marriage of the victim, the Defendant was injured by the victim, in light of the witness’s statement, and the remaining evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is the facts charged.

arrow