(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.12.22. 선고 2017고합904 판결

Five persons, including the defendant and CIC, hereinafter referred to as "C"), D (D, hereinafter referred to as "D"), 1 (E, 'E', 'F', 'F', 'F', and 'F', are working on the part of the defendant in Russia', and three persons, including victims G (G, 20 years of age, hereinafter referred to as "G"), H (H, 21 years of age, hereinafter referred to as "H"), II, 20 years of age, hereinafter referred to as "H"), are working on the part of the victim in Russia's nationality.

Around 04:00 on July 24, 2017, the Defendant and his/her behavior divided the stories with H and I that had been drinking alcohol at the event of the front outer wall located in Jung-gu Seoul, Jung-gu, 264, with his/her own dancing, while he/she divided the stories with H and I that he/she had been drinking alcohol at the outer wall of the front wall of the 264, and C said that “I are dancing rather than dancing for own repair,” and said C was a c as a satching with H that “I dance”, and C went beyond H, and h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h, etc., and h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h, etc.

계속하여 피고인과 그 일행은 같은 날 04:25경 서울 중구 광희동1가 188-10에 있는 광희동 공중화장실 앞길로 I을 데리고 위와 같은 폭력행위를 피하여 도망하던 H를 따라 이동한 후, H의 도움 요청을 받은 피해자 G가 위 장소로 달려오는 것을 보고 C와 성명불상1은 1의 얼굴 등을 주먹 등으로 수회 때리고, 위 장소에 도착한 피해자 G가 H와 함께 D를 때리자 C와 성명불상1은 주먹과 발로 H와 피해자 G를 수회 때리고, D는 주먹으로 피해자 G를 수회 때리고, 피고인은 발로 피해자 G를 2회 걷어찼다.

As a result, the defendant jointly with C, D, name infinite 1, name infinite 2, and the victim G was faced with a face face with which the number of days of treatment can not be known.

Summary of Evidence

1. 피고인의 법정진술(피고인의 변호인은 2017. 11. 6.자 의견서에서 피고인은 피해자를 발로 툭 차는 수준의 경미한 폭행을 하였을 뿐이고 상해에 이르게 한 적은 없다.

On December 5, 2017, the Defendant asserted to the effect that he had been given birth to the victim, and on December 5, 2017, the Defendant recognized that he had given birth to the victim from the beginning.

1. Each legal statement of witness G and J;

1. Statement of the police statement to I, and statement of the police statement to K in the police statement;

1. Report of internal investigation (in summary of the case), internal investigation report (related to a suspect), internal investigation report (related to the verification of personal information of a person in need of investigation), internal investigation report (related to the investigation of CCTV), internal investigation report (related to the verification of details of a report), internal investigation report (related to the investigation of a suspect), internal investigation report (related to the settlement of card use of a suspect), internal investigation report (related to the settlement of card use of a suspect), investigation report (related to the victim's personal investigation report), investigation report (related to a foreigner in short-term stay), investigation report (related to a foreigner in short-term stay), investigation report (related to the card company, etc.), investigation report (related to the results of a writ reply), investigation report (related to the fact of a crime), investigation report (related to the victim 2 and 3 damage); and

1. CCTV1) Image CDs;

Application of Statutes

1. Article relevant to the facts constituting an offense and the selection of punishment;

Article 2(2)3 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, Articles 257(1) and 30 of the Criminal Act

1. Suspension of execution;

Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (The following consideration of favorable circumstances among the reasons for sentencing):

Reasons for sentencing

1. Scope of punishment by law: Imprisonment with prison labor for not more than ten years and not more than six months;

2. Application of the sentencing criteria;

[Scope of Recommendation] General In the mitigated Area of Type 1 (General Injury) (2-1 year) (2-1 year)

[Special Mitigation] Ad hoc Inspector

3. Determination of sentence;

In light of the background leading up to the instant crime committed by the Defendant, etc. as an organization at night, the victim G, etc., and the degree of injury inflicted upon the victim G, etc., the Defendant’s quality of crime is not weak.

However, in consideration of the fact that the victim borrowed the city expenses, the victim does not want the punishment against the defendant, the defendant confessions the facts of the crime in this part and is in depth, the defendant is the initial offender, the degree of the defendant's participation, and other various conditions in the trial process of this case, the punishment as ordered shall be determined and the execution thereof shall be suspended.

The acquittal portion

1. Summary of the facts charged

On July 24, 2017, from around 04:00 to around 04:25, the Defendant and his behavior assaulted the Victim H as indicated in the facts constituting a crime. On the same day, the Defendant and three persons, such as J, etc., who were requested the Victim H to move to the Bream Park located in Jung-gu Seoul, Jung-gu, Seoul, and were in a conversation together with the victim H, and the Defendant were in a vision again, and the Defendant was in a two-time vision of the victim H’s left face face. On August 24, 2017, the victim H was in a mixed state due to an external brain hovassis, etc., and eventually, the victim H was in a mixed state, such as the victim’s h's h's h's h's h's h's h's h's h's h's h's h'm.

Accordingly, the Defendant, in collaboration with C, D, Non-Name No. 1, and Non-Name No. 2, inflicted an injury on the victim H, thereby resulting in the death.

2. Summary of the defendant and defense counsel;

Although the Defendant, as indicated in the facts of the crime in the judgment in the case where C, D, 1, 2, and Ha’s daily operation of the Victim H have been punished, the Defendant was able to support G as if he were the victim H or C, D, D, 1, and 2 were the victim H. However, there was no fact that the Defendant was able to take part in the Defendant’s participation in the Defendant’s participation of the Victim H.

3. Determination

A. We examine whether the Defendant, along with C, D, 1, and 2, committed a crime in the course of the Victim H. As such, there is a result of the J’s police statement (the evidence record 82 pages) and the relative examination conducted on the basis of the record, and each of the above evidence is insufficient to recognize the facts charged that the Defendant was at the time of the Victim H. In light of the following circumstances.

① At this Court, the J testified that, after receiving the third brue video from the CCTV video data No. 58 No. 58 of the evidence list, the first police officer testified that the victim was at the time of the victim’s injury, the victim was at the time of the bit learning and the fluor’s examination. This is the same in fact that the victim was at the time of the above victim’s injury. There is no fact that the Defendant was at the time of the brue video in the brue park, and that there is no fact that the victim was at the time of the victim’s injury in the park, only one person who was at the time of the victim in the park was at the time of the brue.

② In addition, according to the statement of the J, the investigator showed the tensiond CCTV images at the police station, and according to the statement of the J, only one person in the three names of assaulting the victim H at the time is deemed to be a victim, but not certain. The remaining one person is deemed to be the same as the one he knows by the J (Evidence No. 76 pages).

Even in accordance with CCTV images (Evidence No. 58) taken by a park at the time, a person who intends to assault the victim H twice in the park and flee beyond the pents in the park seems to be a person who has suffered a painting, i.e., a person who has sustained a painting, i.e., a person who has driven away beyond the pents, and there is no other confirmation that the defendant assaults the victim H.

④ In addition, K, which had been in the course of the Defendant’s daily behaviors and the instant case, stated to the effect that the investigative agency and this court did not have a brupt the Defendant’s assaulting the victim’s H, and that the assaulting the said victim in a pair of forest parks was called “E” (one-day name “E”), and that G, the victim H’s daily behaviors, also testified to the effect that she was not deemed to have been well-known when the victim was the victim’s H in this court, and that there was no permanent domicile to the effect that the Defendant

B. The remaining evidence produced by the prosecutor alone is insufficient to recognize the fact that the defendant either H as stated in the facts charged or participated in the assault against him/her, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it otherwise.

4. Conclusion

If so, the above facts charged constitute a case where there is no proof of crime, and thus, a judgment of innocence is rendered pursuant to the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act, and a summary of the judgment of innocence is publicly announced pursuant to Article 5