폭력행위등처벌에관한법률위반(집단ㆍ흉기등협박)등
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.
However, for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. In determining facts, the Defendant: (a) destroyed the victim C’s knife by a knife the knife; and (b) did not threaten the victim C and E to drive away.
B. The Defendant suffered from severe depression, and at the time of the instant crime, the Defendant was in a state of mental disability at the time of the crime.
C. The sentence of unfair sentencing (eight months of imprisonment) by the court below is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. Determination ex officio constitutes a violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a collective action, deadly weapon, etc.) among the facts charged in the instant case by the victim C and E, and each violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a collective action, deadly weapon, etc.) is committed against two victims at the same time and at the same place, and thus, constitutes a crime committed against two victims at the same time, and thus, constitutes a single act in light of social norms, and thus, each crime of violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a collective action
The court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on the number of crimes, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.
However, even if there are such reasons for ex officio reversal, the defendant's mistake of facts and the argument of mental suffering from mental disorder in the facts charged of this case is still subject to the judgment of this court.
B. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court regarding the assertion of mistake of facts are as follows: ① the Defendant was found in the victim C’s house, a lessor, who was the lessor of the past, who did not open the door door that he had been leased to her; ② The victim C had consistently sought a sound with the police from the police to the court of the lower court, i.e., the victim’s house, which was the victim E, who was the lessor of the past.