재물손괴등
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts) is as follows: (a) the Defendant had the intent to damage the cell phone of the victim, which had been attached to the victim during the process of scaming the victim's ozone layer.
2. In full view of the following facts and circumstances admitted by the court below based on the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court below, it is not sufficient to recognize that the defendant had the intent to damage the victim's mobile phone, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge that the defendant had the intention to damage the victim's mobile phone.
While the Defendant, while under the influence of alcohol, was driving on the crosswalk, and the signal was not changed in the front of the signal signal in the front of the crosswalk, the Defendant reported the appearance of the crosswalk beyond the crosswalk, and led the victim to scam and scambling off, and then assault the victim. In the process, even though the Defendant was negligent in destroying the victim’s smartphone, the Defendant had a criminal intent to damage the victim’s smartphone.
does not appear.
The time when the Defendant committed an act indicated in the facts charged was around 22:20 at night, and the place where the Defendant stopped is near the crosswalk of the center of the 6-lane road, and thus the light of the street lights is relatively less than that of the 61st century. However, in consideration of the circumstances that the Defendant was relatively old at the time and was living together, it cannot be ruled out that the Defendant did not recognize that the smartphone was installed in the front and rear of the 61st century.
Even if the victim's photographs taken over the victim's Otoba (in the investigation record 35,36), it seems difficult to recognize whether the defendant was a smartphone in the fixed side of Otoba, due to the structure of the relevant Stoba, as the upper part of the smartphone was sealed.