beta
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2015.05.21 2015노56

폭행등

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of 200,000 won.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. There is no fact that there is no victim of mistake of fact in drinking, and there is no fact that even a motor vehicle door is knee and knee.

Nevertheless, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of all the charges of assault and damage to property, and the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The fine of KRW 300,000 imposed by the lower court on the Defendant is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts

A. In full view of the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below and the statement of the witness C, while the defendant and the victim C have been in dispute with the victim's face, the defendant spiting the victim's face and can be sufficiently recognized, so this part of the defendant's assertion is not accepted.

B. The summary of the facts charged (1) around 16:00 on August 18, 2014, the Defendant argued with C in front of Songpa-gu Seoul, Songpa-gu, Seoul. Around 16:00, the Defendant: (a) obstructed the progress of the said cargo vehicle by hanging the vehicle on the instant cargo vehicle; and (b) destroyed the said cargo vehicle driver’s seat even with knee, thereby destroying the repair cost.

Accordingly, the defendant damaged the property owned by the victim.

(2) The lower court found the Defendant and C guilty of the facts charged in full view of each police interrogation protocol, D’s statement of police testimony, D’s statement, investigation report (defluence of vehicle damage) etc.

(3) Comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the statement by the witness C of the party trial, the defendant and C were aware of the dispute, and the victim D was on board at the top of the 1 ton of the string cargo vehicle (hereinafter “the truck of this case”), and the defendant was trying to start the truck of this case by driving the truck of this case.