폭력행위등처벌에관한법률위반(집단ㆍ흉기등상해)등
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
The costs of trial in the trial shall be borne by the defendant.
1. The sentencing of the lower court (five years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable, and the Defendant was in a state of mental disability at the time of each of the instant crimes.
2. According to the record of determination on the claim of mental disability, the Defendant was in the state of drinking alcohol at the time of committing the instant crime of injury on October 31, 2014, and was under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing the crime of injury on October 3, 2012, and the fact that the Defendant was under a certain degree of stress due to conflict with the victims at the time of each of the above crimes.
However, considering the contents and circumstances of each of the instant crimes, and the Defendant’s actions before and after the commission of each of the instant crimes, which are acknowledged by evidence adopted and examined by the lower court and the AC in the written appraisal of appraiser AB and AC, the Defendant does not seem to have reached a state where the Defendant’s ability to discern things or make decisions due to drinking or mental illness at the time of each of the instant crimes. Therefore, the Defendant’
3. The circumstances favorable to the Defendant include: (a) the Defendant was fully aware of the lower judgment on the assertion of unfair sentencing; (b) the Defendant committed the crime of injury on October 31, 2014, voluntarily surrenders to the police; and (c) the Defendant did not have any criminal record more than a suspended sentence.
However, in light of the contents of each of the crimes in this case, which were committed on October 31, 2014 and the statement of mental emotions, the lower court appears to have a very central and dynamic tendency for the Defendant in light of the following: (a) the Defendant, while being investigated by the Defendant for the crime of interference with business affairs, committed the crime of injury on October 31, 2014; and (b) the Defendant, on the ground that the Defendant did not have any objectively legitimate demand, committed the crime of injury on October 31, 2014; and (c) the details of each of the crimes in this case, such as the crime of injury on October 31, 2014, which was committed by himself/herself and his/her father.