beta
(영문) 서울고등법원 2016.11.24 2016노3065

특수상해등

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although a mistake of facts did not assault the victim F or G for the purpose of retaliation, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of violating the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Dggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes) in the facts charged by misunderstanding the facts.

B. At the time of the instant crime, the Defendant was drunk and was in a state of mental disability.

C. The sentence imposed by the lower court (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The lower court, based on the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court, was assaulted by the Defendant on the following grounds that both the victim F and G referred to “112” or intended to report in 112:

“The Defendant clearly stated to the purport, and the Defendant also testified that the investigative agency had tried to prevent the victims from reporting to the police. In full view of the fact that the said victims tried to report to the police, the Defendant can sufficiently recognize the fact that the victims abused the victims for the purpose of retaliation against the provision of the investigation report. Therefore, the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts is without merit.

B. According to the F and G’s statement as to the claim of mental disability, even though the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol at the time of each of the instant crimes, it is difficult to view that the Defendant was in a state of lacking the ability to discern things or make decisions due to drinking, in light of the fact that the Defendant was found to have inflicted an injury on the victim E, and the victim G entered the police to prevent any defect that he/she attempted to report by entering his/her own room.

The defendant's claim of mental disability is without merit.

C. The Defendant’s judgment on the assertion of unfair sentencing is recognized as a substitute for factual facts regarding the instant crime, and the mistake is divided, and the victim F and G are related thereto.