logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 청주지방법원 2020.10.29 2020노731
주거침입등
Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is as follows: (a) at the time of the prosecutorial investigation by the Defendant’s office; (b) a person entering the only way to access the scene of the instant crime from the CCTV near the instant site, other than several senior citizens, was found to have taken place by the Defendant, without any special reason, for about twenty-four minutes; (c) the Defendant worn the wall at the time; (d) the Defendant was found to have broken the wall in the door door of the intrusion attack; (e) the Defendant parked the vehicle at the scene of the instant case and moved to walk about about one point seven km away from the site of the instant case, even if the Defendant was her name at the time of the instant incident; and (e) the sufficient brand discovered at the site of the instant case and the Defendant’s sports brand are the same as the Defendant’s brand and the Defendant’s sports brand, the lower court erred by misapprehending the fact that the Defendant was acquitted, thereby affecting the conclusion

2. In light of the following circumstances, the lower court’s determination on the prosecutor’s assertion of mistake of facts: (a) the following circumstances, which can be acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court; (b) around 15:51 on the date the instant crime was committed by the Defendant under the above CCTV, which entered the path in the direction where the victim’s residence is located at around 16:15; (c) it was not verified whether the Defendant actually visited the victim; (b) whether the Defendant was actually visiting the victim’s residence; and (c) whether the Nonparty was a E brand, such as the family size confirmed at the victim’s residence; and (d) it is difficult to readily conclude that the Defendant reported E-sports at the time of the instant appeal, the circumstances alleged by the prosecutor in the grounds for appeal are indirect facts, and the aforementioned indirect facts are merely indirect facts.

arrow