상해
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. The summary of the grounds of appeal is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts, and the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case on a different premise, although the defendant unilaterally committed an assault from the injured person, and did not inflict an injury by plucking, plucking, etc. of the victim's right hand
2. Determination
A. On June 13, 2015, the Defendant, at around 21:00, inflicted an injury on the part of the Defendant, on the part of the Defendant, by assaulting the victim’s right hand, such as plucking, plucking, plucking, etc., for two weeks of the need to be treated, on the ground that he/she did not have his/her own telephone with the victim A (55 years of age) who was in the vicinity of his/her house located in Gangwon Steel-gun, Gangwon-do.
B. The degree of formation of a documentary evidence to be found guilty in a criminal trial should be such that there is no reasonable doubt. However, it is not required to exclude all possible doubts, and rejection by causing a suspicion with no reasonable ground to acknowledge probative value is not allowed as exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 94Do1335, Sept. 13, 1994). If a witness’s statement is consistent with the witness’s statement in the main part, it is not readily denied the credibility of the statement solely on the ground that it is somewhat inconsistent with the witness’s statement in the main part (see Supreme Court Decision 2008Do12112, Aug. 20, 200). In light of the above legal principle, the victim’s statement was lawfully adopted by the investigative agency and duly examined by the court below, namely, the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence: (i) the victim’s statement from the investigative agency to the right side of the victim.