상습폭행등
All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts and improper sentencing);
A. In fact, the Defendant did not assault C on May 27, 2016 and June 24, 2016, and the Defendant filed a complaint against C with respect to a person’s assault on May 27, 2016 does not constitute an accusation in conformity with objective facts.
Therefore, the judgment of the first instance that found the Defendant guilty of habitual assault and a false accusation was erroneous and adversely affected the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding the facts ( Meanwhile, the Defendant alleged that he did not drive the Defendant on June 27, 2016).
However, the Defendant is making a confession on June 26, 2016, and the content of the lower judgment in the second instance judgment is as follows: “The Defendant driven Oral Ba that was not subscribed to mandatory insurance without a license on June 26, 2016,” and thus, it does not separately determine the aforementioned assertion. (B) The sentence of each lower court’s unfair sentencing (the first instance court: 10 months of imprisonment, and KRW 500,000,000) is too unreasonable.
2. We examine ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for ex officio appeal.
The Court held that each appeal case against the judgment below was consolidated and tried, and that each offense of the judgment below is concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and thus, one punishment should be imposed pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. Thus, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained as it is.
Even if there is such reason for ex officio reversal, the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding of facts (the argument about the judgment of the court of first instance) is still subject to the judgment of this court, and this is examined below.
3. According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court regarding the assertion of mistake of facts, the fact that the Defendant assaulted the victim and reported false facts can be sufficiently recognized (in particular, the statement of the victim, which is a major evidence, is consistent and specific, and the content thereof is consistent and definite ( May 2016).