폭력행위등처벌에관한법률위반(집단ㆍ흉기등폭행)등
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and five months.
No. 1 of the seized evidence shall be from the defendant.
1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the reasons for appeal (one and half years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
2. Ex officio determination: We examine ex officio of the misunderstanding of the legal principles as to the crime of intimidation and intimidation against the victim E.
According to Article 283(3) of the Criminal Act, a crime of intimidation may not be prosecuted against the express will of the victim.
A victim E submitted a letter of withdrawal of complaint before the decision of the court below ( September 1, 2015).
Nevertheless, the court below did not render a judgment dismissing a public prosecution pursuant to Article 327 subparagraph 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act as to intimidation against victim E among the facts charged and deemed the mitigated person of punishment. The court below erred in the misapprehension of legal principles as to intimidation and the crime of non-prosecution of intention, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.
In this point, the judgment of the court below cannot be reversed.
3. Accordingly, the court below's decision is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's unfair argument of sentencing, and it is so decided as follows.
[Judgment] The summary of facts constituting an offense and evidence admitted by a party member of the summary of the facts constituting an offense and evidence is identical to the corresponding column of the judgment below, and thus, it is cited as it is by Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act
However, the facts of the crime in the judgment of the court below are as follows.
3. The Defendant committing the crime against the Victim E: (a) knew of the fact that the Victim E, who is the mother of C and D around June 27, 2015, frequently communicates with the Victim E, and (b) contacted the Victim E, and (c) contact with the Victim E.
I see the contact, "D........", but from the victim E, she is aware of the four sons and why the test is uncompared.
B. We also gather.
1.3. The phrase “ .................”
A. The Defendant, around June 27, 2015, opened a gate at around 22:00, in the victim E’s residence located in Dobong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government G and opened the gate.