beta
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2013.12.18 2013노3448

상해

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. At the time of the instant case of mistake of facts, the Defendant: (a) committed an act of breaking the victim’s trees by putting the victim on a bed, knee, etc. as stated in the facts charged in the instant case, thereby causing injury to the victim; (b) however, there is no fact that the Defendant committed an act of benefiting the victim’s trees, knee, etc., such as knee

Rather, at the time of the above vagabonds, the Defendant suffered damages by saving the victim’s neck and threatening the victim.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous and has affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. Considering the fact that the defendant is against unreasonable sentencing and the circumstances surrounding the occurrence of this case, the punishment imposed by the court below (one million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. (1) On the assertion of mistake of facts, the appellate court should not reverse without permission the first instance judgment on the sole ground that the first instance judgment on the credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance is different from the appellate court’s judgment, in light of the content of the first instance judgment and the evidence duly examined by the first instance court, or unless there are extenuating circumstances to deem that the first instance judgment on the credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance was clearly erroneous in light of the evidence examination conducted by the first instance court and the evidence duly examined by the first instance court, or in exceptional cases where it is deemed that maintaining the first instance judgment on the credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance is remarkably unfair in full view of the evidence examination conducted by the first instance court and the evidence examination conducted by the time the argument was concluded by the appellate court (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2011Do5313, Jun. 14, 2012). 2)