beta
(영문) 대구지방법원 2018.01.19 2017노1030

상해

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the defendant did not inflict an injury on the victim as stated in the judgment below, and even if so, it is not so.

Even if the defendant's act constitutes a legitimate act or an emergency escape, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances found by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court regarding the assertion of mistake of facts, i.e., ① the victim, consistently from the investigative agency to the court of the lower court, consistently with the following circumstances: (a) the victim took care of the chest of the victim during the process of paying the Defendant’s fee; (b) the victim took the head debt of the victim; and (c) the victim took the head debt of the victim; and (d) the neighbor and fighting were removed from one another during the process of taking the head debt of the victim.

그 후 피고인이 계단 위쪽에 서 있다가 발로 피해자의 가슴을 찼다’ 는 취지로 진술하고 있는 점, ② 목 격자 E은 수사기관에서부터 원심 법정에 이르기까지 일관되게 ‘ 집에서 빨래를 하던 중 싸우는 소리가 나서 올라가 보니 피고인과 피해자가 서로 머리채를 잡고 소리를 지르고 있었고, 그 무렵 F가 올라왔다.

피고인과 피해자 두 사람을 서로 떼어 내고 난 후 피고인이 계단 위에서 피해자의 가슴을 발로 찼다’ 는 취지로 진술하여 그 진술내용이 피해자의 진술에 부합하는 점, ③ 목 격자 F는 원심 법정에서 ‘ 설거지를 하다가 소리를 듣고 올라가니 피고인이 몸에 묻은 피해자의 머리카락을 손으로 털고 있었다.

Defendant did not see the victim’s chest, which stated to the effect that the Defendant “as at that time, 502 Adoz. 502 opened a door and talks about it to another in order to talk about that person.”