상해등
The judgment below
Of them, the part on Defendant B shall be reversed.
Defendant
B shall be punished by a fine of three million won.
Defendant
B.
1. The lower court, among the facts charged in the instant case, dismissed the prosecution regarding the assault against Defendant A, and convicted the remainder of the facts charged.
However, among the judgment below, the prosecutor only appealed from the conviction part against the Defendants on the ground of unfair sentencing, and the dismissal part of the prosecution against Defendant A was not dismissed by both Defendant A and the prosecutor, and the dismissal part against the Defendants against Defendant A was separately decided.
Therefore, the scope of the court's judgment is limited to the judgment of conviction.
2. The summary of the grounds for appeal (for the accused, the sentencing and the police officer in each case (1) imprisonment with prison labor for up to six months, suspension of execution for Defendant A, two years, and (2) fine of up to five million won for Defendant B);
3. Determination
A. We agree with the prosecutor's argument that the defendant's judgment on the grounds of appeal by the prosecutor against the defendant A does not mean that the responsibility for the crime against the fixed-time police officer is less severe, and that the prosecutor's serious punishment is necessary for the accumulated crime of violence in the past.
However, considering the favorable circumstances, such as the fact that the defendant recognized the crime and commits a mistake, the police officer's withdrawal of the claim for damages against the defendant, the fact that there is no past record of criminal punishment exceeding the fine, etc., it is not determined that the sentence of the court below is too unreasonable and unreasonable in light of the overall circumstances, such as the defendant's age, character, conduct, environment, etc.
Therefore, the prosecutor does not accept the prosecutor's allegation of unfair sentencing.
B. We examine ex officio prior to the judgment of the prosecutor ex officio as to the part concerning Defendant B’s appeal.
The court below is concerned with the crimes of obstruction of the performance of official duties against Defendant B and the crimes of injury to J, and each of the crimes of obstruction of the performance of official duties against Defendant B and the crimes of injury to J. However, each of the crimes against I and J is in a substantive competition relationship.