logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 성남지원 2014.11.13 2014고단1517
상해
Text

1. Defendant A shall be punished by a fine of one million won, and Defendant B shall be punished by a fine of seven million won.

2. The above fine is imposed on the Defendants.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. At around 11:30 on May 3, 2014, Defendant A brought an injury to the victim, by opening the door door of “Franf car” in the “Franf car in Gwangju City, which is owned by the Defendant, due to the shock of H car, the victim B, who was parked adjacent to the Defendant, in the “Franf car” parking lot in Gwangju City, due to the shock of the victim B, which is located adjacent to the victim B, during the dispute, the victim’s arms were cut down, and the victim’s body was carried out several arms, and the victim’s body was pushed down for approximately two weeks of treatment.

2. Defendant B, at the time and place set forth in the above Paragraph (1) above, disputed with the victim A for the foregoing reasons, and sealed the victim’s shoulder by selling it, and the victim called for reporting to the police, thereby cutting the victim’s fingers off the door of the car at the seat of the heatr, which caused the victim’s fingers in the crepan, which caused approximately 6 weeks of medical treatment.

Summary of Evidence

[Defendant A]

1. Each legal statement of the defendant A and witness I;

2. B written statements;

3. A written diagnosis of injury (Defendant B);

1. Each legal statement of a witness A and I;

2. A medical certificate;

3. Video CDs;

4. Application of statutes on site photographs.

1. Article applicable to criminal facts;

A. Defendant A: Article 257(1) of the Criminal Act; Selection of fines

B. Defendant B: Articles 262 and 260(1) of the Criminal Act; selection of fines

2. The Defendants at the Nowon-gu Station: (a) the Defendant’s judgment on the Defendant’s assertion under Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act is subject to 112, and the Defendant’s act is against one another after being reported by telephone in 112, and the Defendant’s act is against social norms, and the illegality is denied. However, according to the aforementioned evidence, according to the video of the video CD, it is true that the victim’s door-to-face that the Defendant reported by telephone closed the door-to-face.

arrow