beta
Text
The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.
Reasons
1. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is as follows: “The Defendant’s house from May 19, 2017 to May 00 to May 20, 2015, the victim E was in the same manner as the Defendant’s wife at the Defendant’s house of Kimpo-si, Kimpo-si, 507 Dong 1901, and 1901, and the victim faced with the wall by destroying the victim’s breath; the victim’s breath with her breath, the victim’s breath, and the victim’s breath, and the victim’s breath in an elevator; and the victim’s breath, the victim’s breath caused the breath of the head part, which requires the victim’s treatment for two weeks.”
2. In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly adopted and examined in this court’s determination, each statement in E, F’s court and investigative agency to the effect that it conforms to the facts charged in the instant case is difficult to believe that the credibility of the statement is doubtful, and it is insufficient to recognize that the Defendant’s injury was caused by the Defendant’s harming act solely with the medical certificate of injury (E).
The evidence alone submitted by the prosecutor alone that the facts charged are proven to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt
It is difficult to see, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.
A. Examining the part of the files (Evidence No. 2) taken or recorded on the day by the Defendant immediately before and after the start of physical fighting, the Defendant could not be deemed to have engaged in breathing and pushing ahead with the victim E at the same time, and the Defendant appears to have expressed a desire to the Defendant or engaged in several actions.
B. E stated that the Defendant and the Defendant were faced with the chest while fighting their body with breath, and the Defendant was faced with a breast, and the Defendant was faced with a breast or breast with a breast in the wall, but the Defendant did not make a detailed statement about the act before and after the order of time or each breathing act.
Defendant F’s wife in this Court.