beta
(영문) 창원지방법원 2015.09.10 2014노2662

상해

Text

Defendant

The judgment of the court below against B shall be reversed.

Defendant

B. Defendant A’s appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A asserts that the punishment imposed by the lower court (a fine of KRW 700,000) is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant B asserts that the judgment of the court below was erroneous in the misapprehension of facts and affected the conclusion of the judgment, even though there was a fact that Defendant B had been at the time of one time after the arrival of the police officer, but there was no fact that Defendant B inflicted an injury upon E by 4-5 times after having knife the face part after having knife E’s mother and her face part.

2. Judgment on Defendant B’s assertion

A. On January 3, 2014, at around 02:50 on January 3, 2014, Defendant B of this part of the facts charged: (a) when E (40) assaulted himself at the top of the breakwater of Soyang-Eup, Busan Metropolitan City, Yan-si, and he was 4-5 times the face of his son and son who was suffering by the victim.

As a result, Defendant B put on E a scopic scopical scopical scopty that requires approximately 14 days of treatment.

B. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged.

C. 1) The prosecutor bears the burden of proving the criminal facts charged in a criminal trial. The conviction of the Defendant ought to be based on strict evidence with probative value, which makes the judge feel true beyond a reasonable doubt. Thus, if there is no such evidence, even if there is a doubt as to the Defendant’s guilt, the issue is the interest of the Defendant (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2014Do3163, Jun. 12, 2014). 2) The issue at issue is that the Defendant Company Company following the Defendant Company Company asserted that the face level was dried back after the Defendant Company Company’s her mother and her face level was 4-5 and that there was a tension and tension with the Defendant Company. Thus, even if the Defendant Company was dispatched one time at the time under the direction of the police officer, this may result in the E scambling.