폭력행위등처벌에관한법률위반(공동상해)등
1. The part of the judgment of the court below excluding the compensation order shall be reversed.
2. The defendant shall be punished by a fine of two million won.
3...
1. Summary of the grounds for appeal (the misunderstanding of facts and legal principles)
(a) A defendant who violates the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act and the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint confinement) shall not assault or detain the victim jointly with E;
B. Since the Defendant is a lawful holder of the instant collection order, the Defendant did not embezzled the victim’s money.
2. Determination
A. In full view of the following circumstances, the court below’s violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act and the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint confinement) and the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below prior to remand, namely, the victim stated that the victim was subject to assault and confinement from the Defendant and E consistently from the investigation stage, and the CCTV image also conforms to the victim’s statement, it can be sufficiently recognized that the Defendant jointly with E, as stated in the judgment of the court below, inflicted an injury on the victim and detained the victim.
Therefore, Defendant’s assertion is without merit.
B. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court and the lower court prior to remand, the following facts and circumstances can be revealed.
1) With respect to the background leading up to the instant collection order, the victim D and her husband G agreed to transfer the claim against H as child support and consolation money to the victim, while obtaining a promissory note amounting to KRW 200 million in face value from H in the process of divorce, and authenticated this, and consistently stated that H obtained the instant collection order with the title of execution of the instant notarial deed as the title of execution. (2) The instant collection order was issued as of January 24, 2000, not the Defendant, but the victim submitted an application for the seizure benefits prepared in the name of the Defendant along with a certificate of personal seal impression from February 200 to February 24, 200.