beta
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2016.06.23 2015노1214

상해

Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although the Defendant was able to recognize the fact that the Defendant had inflicted an injury on the victim in the course of fighting with the victim, the lower court acquitted the victim of the injury by misunderstanding the fact.

B. The sentence of the lower court that is unfair in sentencing (a sum of KRW 300,00) is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. (1) On September 21, 2014, at around 03:20 on September 21, 2014, the Defendant, the summary of the public prosecution room, the Defendant, at the residence of Gangdong-gu Seoul, Gangdong-gu, Seoul, 504 E, where the injured person, while drinking alcohol together with E and the injured party B, went against the Defendant. As a result, the injured person, at the time of vision, committed assault and pushed off the victim’s head debt and pushed off the victim’s face, hicking the victim’s face, hicking the victim’s face, hicking the victim’s head, etc., and inflicted an injury on the right-hand part, which requires a 10-day treatment.

(2) According to the evidence, the court below held that the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone proves, without reasonable doubt, that the defendant suffered injury or had the criminal intent of injury on the part of the defendant at the time when the defendant was faced with the injury, although it was acknowledged that B was in dispute with the defendant, or immediately after it was in dispute with the defendant, and in light of the following circumstances, B was in conflict with the defendant's minor body fighting, and it seems highly probable that B was in conflict with the defendant's body fighting, or was in conflict with the defendant without proper deliberation.

It is difficult to see otherwise, and judged not guilty on the part of injury on the ground that there is no evidence to acknowledge it.

① The Defendant is arguing from the investigative agency to the court of the lower court that “The Defendant only fighting with B by putting head debt with B, and without breaking B.” The purport is that “the Defendant was completed when fighting with her head by putting on her head debt with B,” and that “the Defendant was completed by putting on her head debt with each other by putting on her head and fighting with each other by the police.”