(영문) 대전지방법원 2015.03.25 2014노3867 | 리걸엔진

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 대전지방법원 2015.03.25 2014노3867

폭행

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of the grounds for appeal (the factual error and inappropriate sentencing)

A. Of the facts charged in the instant case against the Defendant of mistake of facts, as to the part that, around June 5, 2013, around 18:30, the Defendant got off the part of the victim C’s arms and shoulder parts, etc. at the parking lot adjacent to the Mapo District (Article 1 of the lower judgment), there is no fact that the Defendant had the victim prevented from escaping, but there is no time that the Defendant had the victim prevented from escaping.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below that convicted the defendant of the above facts charged is erroneous in misconception of facts.

B. The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (the fine of KRW 1,00,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the judgment of the court below and the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of mistake of facts, the following circumstances are acknowledged.

1) The Defendant made a statement at the prosecutor’s office to the effect that “the victim was able to take the Defendant’s bridge from the vehicle in which she gets the Defendant’s hand to the her hand, and the victim was able to take the her arms and when she got the victim’s chest and the her arms and arms (Evidence Record No. 222, 223, 224)” (Evidence No. 222, 224). In light of the contents of the Kakao Stockholm that the Defendant exchanged with the victim, the Defendant sent the victim a message “It was known that she was her at the time when she died, and that the Kakao Stockholm was her to be detained.” In view of the content of the message that the above case was occurred next to the district, the Defendant appears to have referred to the circumstances at the time of the occurrence of the charges.”

3) From the time of the complaint to the time of testimony at the court of the court below, the victim stated to the effect that “the victim brought the defendant from the vehicle to the detention, and the victim expressed to the effect that “the defendant was at the time when the defendant was able to escape from the vehicle and the head of the defendant was at the time when the defendant was able to escape.”

유사 판례

-대구지방법원 2013.10.10 2013노1141

-대전지방법원 2015.05.14 2014노3457

-광주고등법원 2013.05.09 2012노472

-대전지방법원 2015.09.10 2015노1676

-의정부지방법원 2020.11.12 2019노2385