폭력행위등처벌에관한법률위반(공동공갈)
Defendant
All A’s appeal and prosecutor’s appeal are dismissed.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The sentencing of Defendant A is too inappropriate.
B. In full view of the evidence submitted by the Prosecutor 1 of the facts and the misapprehension of the legal principle, although the Defendants could have jointly recognized the fact that they conspired with the victims, the lower court rendered a not-guilty verdict on the charge of violating the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint conflict). In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine and misapprehending the legal doctrine.
2) The lower court’s sentencing against the illegal Defendants is too uncomfortable.
2. Determination
A. 1) The summary of the facts charged in this part of the indictment is that the Defendants were jointly and severally provided with the victims, as stated in the facts charged in the lower judgment.
2) The lower court determined that the Defendants acquitted the Defendants of this part of the facts charged on the ground that the Defendants did not constitute a joint crime under Article 2(2) of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, on the following grounds: (a) even though the Defendants conspired with the joint Defendants to complete the entire crime through a functional control; (b) there is insufficient evidence to acknowledge that the Defendants committed only Defendant B and other Defendants participated in the crime; and (c) the Defendants cannot be applied to cases where two or more persons under Article 2(2) of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act jointly committed the crime.
3) Examining the records of the above deliberation in light of the records, we affirm and accept the above fact finding and determination by the court below, and otherwise there is an error of misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles as alleged by the prosecutor in the judgment below.
Therefore, the prosecutor's above assertion is without merit.
B. The fact that the crime of this case is not very good, the frequency of the crime is several times, and the defendant A commits the crime of this case.