logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.09.06 2017노3935
폭행
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses of the trial shall be borne by the defendant.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts and legal principles) The Defendant demanded the victim at the time of the instant case to order the victim to appear outside of the body of the victim, and did not assault the victim’s face with the document file in the form of document approval or with the victim’s clothes drawn up and sold as stated in the facts charged (hereinafter “instant assertion”). Even in the process of preventing the victim from leaving outside of the body, the Defendant considered the victim’s clothes or brought in the arms.

Even if the defendant's act is aimed at preventing any further acts by requiring the victim to surrender, and thus, it is not illegal as it constitutes a legitimate act or a legitimate defense (hereinafter referred to as "B's assertion"). Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the facts charged is erroneous by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. (1) The following circumstances acknowledged by the court below and the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below as to the assertion: (i) the victim took his face from the investigative agency to the court below to the court below, and (ii) the defendant took clothes or took in arms so that he does not go out of the coffee shop, and made a concrete and consistent statement, and (iii) was present at the time.

G and coffee shop employees also made a statement that corresponds to the situation at the time of the lower court’s trial in substitution with the victim’s statement. Comprehensively taking account of the fact that: (a) the situation revealed in the result of the reproduction listening of a recording file CD (Evidence No. 11); and (b) the contents of conversation, etc. are consistent with the victim’s statement, the Defendant may fully recognize the fact that the Defendant made the victim’s face with the document file approved as the document file, and made the victim’s clothes knife and assaulted with the victim’s clothes.

B. As to the argument

arrow