(영문) 제주지방법원 2015.02.05 2014고정521

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 제주지방법원 2015.02.05 2014고정521

폭행

Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of 200,000 won.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

At around 17:00 on December 28, 2013, the Defendant assaulted the victim E, who had frequently been in dispute with the victim E, who had been living in the Defendant’s domicile of the Defendant C, and had been living in the lower floor as a resident of 201, and had been living in the middle of the upper floor noise.

Summary of Evidence

1. Each legal statement of witness F and G;

1. Each police statement to F and E;

1. Each statement of E and F;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to each photograph and diagnostic document;

1. Relevant provisions of criminal facts: Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Attraction of a workhouse: Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act;

1. The order of provisional payment: The defense counsel on the defense counsel's assertion under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act asserts that the defendant's defense counsel merely caused the victim's f where the victim's spouse who intrudes on the defendant's residence and acted as the victim's spouse F, who would inflict harm on his/her child, by causing the victim's f, and this constitutes legitimate self-defense or legitimate act, as it aims to protect the child of the defendant.

According to the evidence mentioned above, a person who threatened the defendant's child was F, the husband of the victim, and the victim did not directly engage in such behavior. After F had expressed a threatening speech to the defendant's child, the victim and the defendant were in the situation where the defendant and the defendant were in the presence of the defendant, and the victim were in the situation where the victim and the defendant were in the presence of the defendant, and the victim were in the presence of the victim, and they were in the face of breath, and they were in the victim's child. The defendant tried to take such action against the defendant's child on the ground of a threatening speech that the F had had about the defendant's child, and tried to restrain the victim from doing so.

참조조문

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 2013.07.25 2013노2105

-인천지방법원 부천지원 2018.06.29 2017고정989

-인천지방법원 부천지원 2017.05.12 2016고합305

-광주고등법원 2015.05.28 2015노148

-서울북부지방법원 2015.05.13 2015노89