beta
(영문) 광주지방법원 2016.04.21 2016노7

특수상해

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. At the time of committing the instant crime, the Defendant was in a state of mental and physical loss or mental weakness due to drinking.

B. The punishment of the lower court (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. We examine ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant.

In an appellate trial, the Prosecutor filed an application for changes in the indictment with regard to the Defendant’s name of the crime (a violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a group, deadly weapon, etc.) as “special injury” under the Criminal Act, and the applicable legal provisions “Article 3(1), 2(1)3, and Article 257(1) of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act,” respectively, to “Article 258-2(1) and Article 257(1) of the Criminal Act,” respectively, and the same court was changed by granting permission.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below can no longer be maintained.

However, the defendant's argument about mental disorder is still subject to the judgment of this court, despite the above reasons for reversal of authority.

B. According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of mental disorder, the defendant is deemed to have a drinking condition at the time of the crime of this case, but in light of various circumstances such as the background leading up to the crime of this case, the means and method of the crime, the behavior of the defendant before and after the crime of this case, and the circumstances after the crime, the defendant had no or weak ability to discern things or make decisions due to drinking.

As such, the defendant's above assertion cannot be accepted.

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed ex officio pursuant to Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's unfair argument of sentencing, and the judgment below is reversed, and it is again decided as follows through pleading.