beta
(영문) 부산지방법원 2016.08.25 2016노995

모욕등

Text

The judgment below

The part against the defendant shall be reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 700,000.

The defendant above.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. As to the mistake of facts or misapprehension of the legal principles, the Defendant took a bath to the victim in the Defendant’s collection method, so there was no performance. As to the damaged part of a fence, the Defendant did not violate the social rules by pushing the damaged part of the wall with a fence accumulated without permission on the land owned by the Defendant. As to the damaged part, the Defendant was sentenced to a fine of KRW 300,000 on April 15, 2015 by committing a crime that destroyed the parts owned by the victim around 19:00, and there was only the fact that the Defendant was sentenced to a fine of KRW 300,000,000 on April 15, 2014, and there was no fact that the damaged part was damaged on the same place around 08:50, as in this part of the facts charged.

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts charged or by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (one million won in penalty) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The lower court, based on the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, determined that the Defendant and Co-Defendant B expressed a desire for the victim not only D but also J and K, a neighboring resident, in the lower court’s court, as well as the sound that the Defendant and Co-Defendant B wished to the victim.

Since it is recognized that the statement has been made by day, it was recognized that the performance of insult is recognized.

In light of the relevant legal principles, the court below’s finding of facts and determination are acceptable, and there is no violation of law as alleged in the grounds of appeal.

2) As to the damage of property, "an act that does not violate social rules" under Article 20 of the Criminal Act as to whether the damaged part constitutes a justifiable act means an act that is acceptable in light of the overall spirit of legal order or the social ethics or social norms surrounding it, and any act is social norms.

참조조문