beta
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2018.06.28 2017노1181

상해

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant, as stated in the judgment of the court below, did not commit assault to catch or pushed down a victim’s bage.

The statements of the victim and G cannot be believed, and the written diagnosis of injury was prepared on the basis of the victim's erroneous statement about the circumstances in which the victim suffered the wound, and the on-site recording (USB) only indicates that the defendant is suffering from fighting.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case on the ground of these evidence is erroneous by misapprehending the rules of evidence and thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The Defendant, by misapprehending the legal doctrine, did not commit assault against the victim’s breath or pushing in the breath, and took the victim who flaps out of the damaged part of the disaster, and the victim sold flaps to get out of the Defendant’s flaps together with G with G. The Defendant’s act constitutes a passive defensive act, and thus, it is dismissed that the Defendant’s act constitutes a passive act that is reasonable to be permitted in light of social norms.

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the establishment of the crime of injury, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

(c)

In light of the fact that: (a) a person who has suffered unfair damage in sentencing desires to the defendant and is able to take the defendant's return to the defendant; (b) the defendant set up against it; and (c) the degree of the victim's injury is minor, etc., the sentence of the court below (one million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In light of the evidence presented in the judgment of the court below on the misapprehension of facts and legal principles, the court below duly adopted and investigated the following circumstances, i.e., the victim F, “the victim F was satisfing with the Defendant and satisfing, and the victim was satched beyond the location where the victim was satisfing.” and the victim was satched and clarified in the police.