beta
(영문) 부산지방법원 2017.02.10 2016노3529

상해

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The victim's injury by mistake of fact is a crime committed by a person who is in a bad relationship with the victim, and the defendant confirmed the scene of the crime by returning home, and provided relief to the victim, and although the victim was not injured, the court below convicted the defendant. The judgment of the court below is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The punishment sentenced by the court below against the defendant (two years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts

A. The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant is a disabled person of Grade IV with physical disability with inconvenience in ordinary legs, and the marital relationship with the victim C (V, 48 years old), which completed the marriage report on September 8, 200.

On September 15, 2015, the Defendant, at around 20:49, entered the Defendant’s house of 102 Dong Dong 1205, Busan Shipping Daegu Do apartment of 102, 1205, and her house at the Defendant’s house in the influence of alcohol, she listened to the breath of the Defendant’s speech that she would drink her drinking from the injured party, and her fingers the victim’s desire to do so, and her left side her hand.

이에 피해자가 왜 때리느냐고 하면서 피고인을 밀치자, 피고인은 더욱 화가 나 피해자의 머리채를 잡은 채 끌고 다니면서 벽에 피해자의 머리를 찧은 다음, 바닥에 내동댕이쳐 넘어뜨리고, 대나무 막대기로 피해자의 온몸을 수회 때리다가 목을 조른 후, 피해자의 머리를 잡고 거실에 있는 테이블에 힘껏 밀쳐 부딪히게 하여 정신을 잃게 하였다.

As a result, the Defendant inflicted injury on the victim, such as cerebral cerebral cerebrovassis, which requires approximately eight weeks of medical treatment.

B. The lower court’s judgment: (a) although the victim clearly stated that he/she was a criminal, the lower court prepared a written confirmation that the Defendant was not related to the instant case on November 6, 2015, the victim was to recover the marital relationship with the Defendant, the husband, and the husband.