beta
(영문) 창원지방법원 2018.07.11 2018노559

상해

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The sentence of sentence against the defendant shall be suspended.

Reasons

1. According to the summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts) and the statement and written diagnosis of injury of victims and witnesses, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts and acquitted the Defendant on the part of the victim.

2. The prosecutor ex officio held that the court below's facts charged of the injury which the court below acquitted were the primary facts charged, and applied for the amendment of the indictment to add the facts charged of the assault to the ancillary facts charged, and this court permitted it and changed the subject of the judgment. As seen later, the court below's judgment that found the defendant guilty of the ancillary facts charged cannot be maintained.

Despite such reasons for ex officio destruction, the argument that the prosecutor's primary facts of the indictment is still subject to the judgment of this court.

3. Determination as to the prosecutor's assertion of mistake as to the injury

A. The primary criminal defendant is a person who is in charge of the chairperson of the tenant's meeting of Seongbuk-gu, Changwon-si, Changwon-si, Sungwon-si, and the victim D (V, 54 years old) was responsible for the audit of the above tenant's meeting.

On October 14, 2016, around 08:10 on October 14, 2016, the Defendant entered the management office with the victim as a management office in order to take into consideration the Defendant’s writing that slanders himself/herself on the above apartment management office, and that the damaged person puts his/her name on the Kakao Stockholm TV room of the above apartment group.

Although the victim was defective, the victim refused to attend the school on the ground of his attendance, etc., and left the school on several occasions, and when the victim gets off the part, such as the victim's shoulder and arms, the victim was faced with the need for treatment for about two weeks.

B. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated, the lower court’s judgment on the instant facts charged.