폭력행위등처벌에관한법률위반(집단ㆍ흉기등상해)
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.
However, the above punishment for a period of two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.
1. The sentence imposed by the court below (one year and six months of imprisonment) on the summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable.
2. Upon ex officio determination, the prosecutor applied the applicable law to "special injury" from "Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a collective deadly weapon, etc.)" to "Article 3 (1), Article 2 (1) 3, and Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act" to "Article 258-2 (1) and Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act", and applied law to "Article 258-2 (1) of the Criminal Act and Article 257 (1) of the Criminal Act." This court permitted the same and thereby, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained as it is.
3. Thus, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's unfair argument about sentencing, and the judgment below is reversed, and it is again decided as follows after pleading.
【Re-written judgment】 The criminal facts against the defendant recognized by the court and the summary of the evidence are as stated in the corresponding column of the judgment below, and thus, they are quoted in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.
Application of Statutes
1. Relevant Article of the Criminal Act and Articles 258-2 (1) and 257 (1) of the Criminal Act (a point of special injury) concerning the facts constituting an offense;
1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the stay of execution (The following circumstances considered in favor of the reasons for sentencing);
1. The reason for sentencing in Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act for the observation of protection and observation seems to lead to the instant crime by the Defendant as a contingency in the victim’s abusive or fighting proposal.
However, the Defendant used violence that could cause serious injury to the victim, with the view to undiscriminatory brushing net, which is a dangerous object.
However, the victim did not reach a serious injury since the victim prevented the defendant's camping net from selling it.
As such, dangerous articles are carried with them without discrimination.