[폭력행위등처벌에관한법률위반][공1987.12.15.(814),1832]
(a) The sex of the crime of injury, in cases of inflicting an injury on any person other than the purpose;
(b) The meaning of "crime of the preceding Article" or "crime of the preceding Article" as provided in Article 3 (1) of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act;
A. In a case where Party A, with three grade B and three different knifies, and with three knife them, and with such three knife them, and inflicted an injury on Party B who tried to knife the knife, it cannot be said that Party A’s criminal intent is recognized, and that the person who suffered the injury cannot be said to constitute an injury by negligence on the ground that the person who suffered the injury is another person who is not the target person.
B. The phrase "crimes of the preceding Article" or "crimes of the preceding Article" under Article 3 (1) of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act refer to only the crimes of the preceding Article of the Criminal Code under Article 2 (1) and do not refer to habitual offenders of the crimes of this Article under Article 2 (1) of the Criminal Code.
(a) Article 15 of the Criminal Act and Article 257(1) of the Criminal Act;
B. Supreme Court Decision 83Do3105 delivered on March 13, 1984, Supreme Court Decision 86Do648 delivered on May 27, 1986
Defendant
Defendant
Attorney Park Jin-ok
Seoul Criminal Court Decision 87No2499 delivered on July 14, 1987
The appeal is dismissed.
40 days out of detention days prior to the imposition of judgment after an appeal shall be included in the penalty of the original judgment.
As to the grounds of appeal by the Defendant and defense counsel:
According to the evidence admitted by the court of first instance as cited by the court below, it can be sufficiently recognized the criminal facts of the defendant's judgment, and there is no other force between three infinites and three infinites, and three infinites with a 30 centimeters knife knife knife knife knife and knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife, and it cannot be considered as the crime of injury by negligence on the part of another person who is not the person who suffered the injury. In light of all circumstances such as the process of fighting and the method of crime, it cannot be said that the defendant's criminal
In addition, although the judgment of the court below is stated in Articles 3(2) and (1), 2(1), and 257(1) of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act as applicable provisions of law, "crimes under the preceding Article" or "crimes under the preceding Article" under Article 3(1) of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act refer only to crimes under Article 2(1) of the Criminal Act, and they do not refer to habitual crimes under Article 2(1) of the Criminal Act, and the judgment of the court below does not regard habitual crimes under Article 257(1) of the Criminal Act, so the judgment of the court below is also a case where a crime under Article 257(1) of the Criminal Act is committed habitually against the defendant, and it does not constitute elements under Article 3(2) and (1) of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, but it does not constitute crimes under Article 257(1) of the Criminal Act, and it does not constitute the elements under Article 3(2) and (1) of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act.
The arguments are without merit, and this appeal is dismissed, and 40 days of detention days before and after the final appeal is made by applying Article 57 of the Criminal Act, and are so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges who are to include in the punishment of the original judgment.
Justices Yoon Il-young (Presiding Justice)