상해
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal reveals that the Defendant was assaulted first by the victim at the time of the appeal. However, the Defendant could not have any physical contact with the victim on the wind that the said employees could not have any physical contact with the victim on the ground that the Defendant was satisfed by catfing his cat, thereby getting unsatisfed.
Nevertheless, the court below found the defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case. The court below erred by misunderstanding facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.
2. Determination
A. On May 27, 2011, the Defendant: (a) around 08:50 on the D garage in Daegu-gu, Daegu-gu; (b) around 08:50 on May 27, 201, the Defendant was punished for Si expenses due to the following: (c) the victim E (the age of 49) and the Defendant did not engage in personnel management; and (d) on the face of the victim due to drinking, the Defendant was in charge of brain, fluorum, fluorum and tension, which requires approximately two weeks of treatment to the victim; and (e) on the face of
B. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged on the grounds of the evidence stated in its reasoning.
다. 당심의 판단 (1) 이 사건 공소사실 발생 당시 목격자들의 진술 내용 ㈎ J의 진술 내용 피고인과 피해자가 양손으로 서로의 목부분과 몸통부분을 잡고 서로 엉겨붙어 있는 상황에서 주변 동료들이 피고인과 피해자를 말린 기억이 나고, 서로 때리거나 상처를 직접 본 기억은 없다.
㈏ 원심 증인 F의 진술 내용 피고인이 피해자를 향해 주먹을 휘두른 것은 사실인데, 당시 주변 동료들이 제지를 하여 피해자가 맞았는지, 맞았다면 어느 부위를 맞았는지 잘 모르고, 당시 피해자의 입술에 피가 고여 있었는데, 경찰에서는 ‘피해자의 입술에서 피가 나서 피해자가 피고인에게 맞지 않았겠느냐’라는 취지로 진술하였을 뿐인데, 경찰 진술조서에서는 자신이 피해자가...