폭행
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendant did not appear at the time and place indicated in the facts charged, and accordingly did not commit violence to the victim.
2. In the judgment below, the defendant argued the same purport as the above reasons for appeal, and the court below, as to this, there is credibility in the statement because the victim, witness E, F, and G have consistently and specifically made a statement about the facts and circumstances of damage, damage level, etc. of the victim, witness E, F, and G in this case, and the defendant 2 at the time and place of the police investigation conducted a conflict with the victim at the time and place of the crime as stated in the judgment of the court below.
(3) According to the fact that there is no objective evidence to prove that the defendant had committed an assault against the victim as stated in the judgment of the court below, the defendant can sufficiently recognize the fact that he committed an assault against the victim as stated in the judgment of the court below.
Accordingly, the defendant's assertion was rejected.
In addition to the circumstances indicated by the lower court, the following circumstances recognized by the lower court by comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, namely, the victim embezzled road compensation.
“Abreging that one’s bresh was flat
The Defendant also stated that the victim and vagabonds were broken up as a matter of “compensation for roads in Ansan L”.
The statements of each of the above witnesses are in accord with each other, and even though there were some confusions with the victim's statements on the date and time of crime, this case is consistent with the fact that it was a date of time among the doors in the around November 2012, and even if the defendant acknowledges that there was a dispute with the victim after the trial was completed, the above witness's statements of each of the above court below can be trusted. Thus, the defendant can sufficiently recognize the facts that he assaulted the defendant at the date and place in the decision of the court below.
Therefore, the defendant in the judgment of the court below.