logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2016.09.01 2016고정413
재물손괴등
Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. Around April 5, 2015, the Defendant damaged the victim D’s house located in Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, thereby damaging the front door glass equivalent to KRW 40,000, the market price of which is the victim’s ownership, by an influoring tool.

2. Around the same time as that of paragraph 1, the Defendant: (a) destroyed the victim D’s house glass; (b) opened the entrance door and opened the house door; and (c) invaded the victim’s house.

3. The Defendant thefted KRW 210,00,00 in cash, which is one of the victims of the victim’s house described in paragraph (1), around the same time as that of paragraph (1), with the victim’s house described in paragraph (1).

2. According to the police statement of the witness D's legal statement and the statement of the D, around 19:00 on April 3, 2015, D returned to the hospital after leaving the bank owned by the Defendant at his/her own house and returning to the hospital. At around 09:00 on April 5, 2015, the Defendant found D to be a sick room where D was hospitalized and changed the key, but D refused this. However, D's refusal to leave the hospital on April 6, 2015, and the door door door was broken down at the house, and the door door was broken down and the cash 2.10,000 won owned by D was broken. In light of a series of facts, in light of the series of facts, the Defendant entered D's house into the house, and caused intrusion upon D's residence at the time of refusal, thereby leaving the house.

However, the burden of proof for the criminal facts prosecuted in a criminal trial is to be borne by the public prosecutor, and the conviction should be based on the evidence with probative value that makes the judge feel true to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt, so if there is no such evidence, the suspect is suspected of guilt even in the absence of such evidence.

Even if there is no choice but to judge the interests of the defendant.

The evidence presented by the prosecutor alone is found as above, while D is hospitalized in the hospital, the defendant's bank is as D.

arrow