beta
(영문) 울산지방법원 2014.11.28 2014노718

폭행

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 300,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

Reasons

1. According to the summary of the grounds of appeal of this case, the court below found the defendant not guilty of the facts charged of this case, which affected the conclusion of the judgment, despite the fact that the defendant committed assault against the victim.

2. Determination

A. The lower court made a statement to the effect that the statements in the victim D, witness E investigation agency, and the court of the lower court are not consistent, and D, witness D, and E got out of the investigative agency and the court of the lower court’s trial to the effect that “the defendant was able to get out of the stairs of the first floor, which occur immediately after the occurrence of the defendant’s injury,” in the investigative agency and the court of the lower court. In light of the fact that it appears that it was difficult for the defendant to go out to the stairs of the first floor in the apartment, in view of the description of the injury diagnosis certificate as to the degree of injury of the defendant at the time of the instant case and the witness F’s statement, etc., the lower court acquitted the defendant on the ground that there was no credibility in the above statement,

B. The crime of assault in the judgment of the party constitutes an assault as an exercise of unlawful tangible force against a victim, even though the victim did not directly contact the body of the victim, since it does not necessarily mean the exercise of physical tangible force against the body of the person, and thus it is not necessary to have any contact with the victim, and thus, it constitutes an assault as an exercise of unlawful tangible force against the victim.

(See Supreme Court Decision 89Do1406 delivered on October 13, 1990). The following circumstances acknowledged by the records of this case are acknowledged: (i) the Defendant stated in the police that “the victim’s part of the lower part of the lower part of the lower part of the lower part of the lower part of the lower part of the lower part of the lower part of the lower part of the lower part of the lower part of the lower part of the lower part of the lower part of the lower part of the lower part of the lower part of the lower part of the lower part of the lower part of the lower part of the lower part of the lower part of the evidence