logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 울산지방법원 2019.09.19 2019고단1444
폭행
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for four months.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The defendant was a person who was in charge of remodeling the C Hospital General Director in Yangsan-si, and was notified of dismissal from D by the president of the C Hospital as of February 28, 2019.

On March 12, 2019, around 09:20 on March 12, 2019, the Defendant committed assault against the victim E (the age of 65) who is the head of the administrative office of the above hospital, during the Do, who had been carrying out construction with the human father who had been moving to the Defendant at the construction site of the above C Hospital 5 bottled the victim, who was not authorized by the victim E (the age of 65).

Summary of Evidence

1. Each legal statement of witness E and F;

1. Each police statement concerning E and F;

1. The result of the verification of the voice file storage CD in this court [the E, F’s legal and investigative agencies consistent with the facts of prosecution may believe that each statement is in light of the recorded conversations and sound contents at the time of the instant case. If, as the Defendant’s assertion, the victim tolds that he would incur photographs to the following F without any contact with the Defendant, it is evident that it is an act to mislead the Defendant, and thus, the Defendant who was under serious conflict with the victim had no choice but to have expressed a speech and behavior strongly against the victim’s behavior at the time of the recording, and it is difficult to believe the Defendant’s argument at the end of the Defendant at the time of the recording. Although there was no fact that the Defendant did not have any contact with E, it is difficult to find the above part of the statement in G’s court and investigative agencies that the Defendant viewed that he was in excess of the Defendant’s statement that there was no pillar at the scene of the instant case, it is inconsistent with objective facts (such as several columns) and that there was no obligation between the Defendant and G, and that he was transferred from the police officer.

1. Article 260 of the Criminal Act concerning the crime

arrow