폭력행위등처벌에관한법률위반(공동상해)
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendants are not guilty.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The Defendants did not jointly commit an injury to the victim E as stated in the facts charged.
B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (a fine of KRW 1.5 million) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. The summary of the facts charged was around 00:05 on August 16, 2010, the Defendants knew that Dtel 1307, which is the ownership of the Defendants, was leased to the families of the victims following the death of the Defendants, and came to have a dispute with the victims with the victim, knowing that the said Dtel 1307 was leased to the families of the victims E.
Defendant
A, in the same place, it threatened the victim's growth with golf loans that had been made in the rest of the victim's bath and the victim set up against golf loans, thereby threatening the defendant B (hereinafter referred to as "B") to "Is, Ws, Ws, Ws, Ws, Ws, and Ws, Ws, Ws, and Ls, B.
Therefore, the defendant B, who frighted the frighter of drinking victim, followed the defendant B, who moved out of the above 1401, and the defendants met the face and body of the victim by drinking outside the above 1401, and the victim was placed on the left-hand 5th-hand level, which requires treatment for about 28 days.
B. The lower court determined that all the charges against the Defendants were guilty on the basis of the evidence presented in its judgment.
C. In some of the facts charged against the Defendants in the trial of the political party, the victim's statements in the court of the court below, the court of the trial of the party and the investigation agency, F's statements in the court of the court below and the investigation agency, G's statements in investigation agency, the victim's injury diagnosis statement and medical record are examined.
① As to the statements made by the victim at the lower court, the lower court, the lower court, and the investigative agency, the following circumstances recognized by the records of this case, namely, the Defendants consistently, i.e., the victim’s blick with his hand first, and the victim’s blick with his hand, respectively.