logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2017.11.29 2017고정989
상해
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 500,000.

Where the defendant fails to pay the above fine, one hundred thousand won shall be one day.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On February 16, 2017, at around 16:10, the Defendant took a bath to the victim C ( South, 74 years old) who has a Baduk on the front way of “hyeong Park” located in Jung-gu Seoul, Jung-gu, Seoul, which is located in 206.

Therefore, the victim caused injury to the victim, such as dume, flaps, flaps, and ebbbbbbage, and flaps, and flapsing the victim’s left side bridge, and flapsing over about three weeks by walking the victim’s ebbbbbbbbb, etc., which requires approximately three weeks of treatment.

Summary of Evidence

1. The legal statement of the witness C;

1. A criminal investigation report (Attachment ofCCTV image data and a photograph to the closure);

1. A written diagnosis of injury;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on CCTV image data;

1. Relevant Article 260 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting a crime and Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. Determination as to the assertion by the Defendant and his/her defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The Defendant alleged that he was unable to dump the breath from the injured party along with his bath, and that he only dump the victim’s bat at a legitimate defense level, and did not inflict an injury on the victim by walking the victim’s bridge.

2. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court, it is recognized that the victim first performed flapsing of the defendant at the time of the case, but on the other hand, the defendant was found to have inflicted an injury on the victim by immediately cutting down the victim's flab and pushing ahead with the flab and cutting down the victim's bridge. In light of the background of the case, the degree and method of the assault inflicted on the victim by the defendant, and the degree and method of the assault inflicted on the victim by the defendant, etc., it is difficult to view the defendant's act as constituting a legitimate defense, and

arrow