logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 춘천지방법원 영월지원 2019.05.14 2018고정55
재물손괴등
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of one million won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

At around 16:30 on October 8, 2017, the Defendant: (a) committed an act of cutting off the cell phone used by the victim by hand in order to prevent the victim from photographing the defect in his/her dwelling, and (b) caused the victim’s sprinking of the cell phone amount by breaking the cell phone used by his/her hand; (c) caused the victim’s buckbucks to bucks on one occasion; and (d) caused the victim’s buckbucks to the victim’s hair by hand.

Accordingly, the defendant damaged the cell phone of the victim to the extent of 190,000 won, and assaulted the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. The statements made by witnesses C and D in the fourth trial records;

1. On the spot, the scene, the photograph of the damage, the estimate, and the defense counsel: ① With respect to the damaged part of the property, the Defendant was away from the victim’s Handphone, but at that time, the Handphone of the victim was not damaged, and even if it was damaged at that time.

Even if the defendant did not have the intention to damage the property, and ② the part of the assault was committed in the process of setting up against the victims, so it is not illegal as a legitimate act.

First of all, according to the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court as to the damage and damage of property, the defendant tried to shoot the body of the defendant by means of handphone while resisting the victim, and the defendant's handphone was found to fall away from the floor.

If the facts are the same, it is difficult to view that the Handphone was already damaged solely on the ground that the Defendant had had the intent to destroy and damage property, and that the victim had been entrusted with repair at the time 45 days have elapsed from the date of the occurrence of the instant case, as alleged by the Defendant.

This part of the argument is accepted.

arrow