재물손괴등
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
All the costs of the original judgment and the trial shall be borne by the defendant.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. As to the mistake of facts - insult, the Defendant had expressed the victim’s desire against the defect that the victim G, who is a police officer, tried to arrest himself/herself. However, as stated in this part of the facts charged, the Defendant did not wish to the victim solely on the ground that the damaged person had prevented the Defendant from disturbing the Defendant’s disturbance and abusiveing prior to the arrest of the Defendant.
Nevertheless, since the court below found the defendant guilty of the facts charged as to the insult of this part, the court below erred in the misapprehension of facts.
B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (an amount of KRW 1.5 million) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below, such as the statement of the victim G and witness E in the investigation agency corresponding to the facts charged in the instant case as to the assertion of mistake of facts, the defendant could have abused the victim G as stated in this part of the facts charged. Thus, the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts is without merit.
B. Determination of the unjust assertion of sentencing is the circumstances favorable to the defendant, such as that the defendant does not want the punishment of the defendant under an agreement with the victim E of the crime of damaging the property in this case by the investigative agency, that the defendant damaged the property of the victim E, and that the degree of insulting the victim G is not relatively serious.
However, in full view of the following facts: (a) the Defendant destroyed the property of the above victim by launching off the street screen installed by the victim E without any reason; and (b) the nature of the crime is not good by taking account of the following factors: (c) the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, and circumstances after committing the crime; and (d) all the sentencing conditions specified in the arguments of this case, such as the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, and circumstances after committing the crime, it is difficult to view that the sentence imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable.
3. Conclusion.