beta
(영문) 부산지방법원 2013.04.19 2013노496

모욕등

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Fact-finding 1) Of the facts charged in the instant case, there is no memory as to the insult of the victim E: 2) Of the facts charged in the instant case, the fact that the victim M and K did not have a mind to pay the price under the influence of alcohol, there was no criminal intent to obtain the alcohol price, etc., and the fact that the victim was disturbed is not memory.

B. At the time of committing each of the instant crimes with mental disorder, the person was in the state of mental disorder or mental disability.

C. The sentence of an unreasonable sentencing (ten months of imprisonment) by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts

A. The Defendant, in the lower court, acknowledged the entire crime of this case as to victim E, but denied the crime to the effect that “it is not identical to that that of the Defendant, although not having been detained,” as the grounds for appeal in this part of the judgment of the lower court.

However, in full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the court below and the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court below, the defendant can sufficiently recognize the facts of insulting the victim three times.

① According to the consistent statement of E by witnesses E at the trial, the Defendant found two times as a problem of taxi charges with each other with a taxi driver, and expressed the victim’s desire before other police officers, as well as the taxi driver and other police officers, and thereafter, he/she took a bath again.

In addition, the defendant asserted that "it is not the same as that of alcohol dementia, but it is not the same as that of such dementia," and did not make any other reasonable justification.

② The Defendant alleged to the effect that the crime of insult three times is committed against the same victim at intervals of 20 and 3 hours, and thus, should be subject to a single comprehensive crime. However, the Defendant is the same day.