폭력행위등처벌에관한법률위반(집단ㆍ흉기등상해)
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. In order to defend the victim’s attack, the Defendant, as a hand, was aware of the victim’s face once, and did not inflict an injury by breaking the victim’s face into a brick.
B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for an ex officio appeal, the prosecutor tried to examine the facts charged in the first instance judgment, and the prosecutor applied the law to change the applicable law to “Article 3(1) and Article 2(1)3 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act and Article 257(1) of the Criminal Act,” respectively, “Article 258-2(1) and Article 257(1) of the Criminal Act” as “Article 258-2(1) of the Criminal Act and Article 257(1) of the same Act,” and the judgment of the court below is no longer upheld since the same is changed to the subject of the judgment by allowing it.
However, despite the above reasons for reversal of authority, the defendant's assertion of mistake is still subject to the judgment of this court, and this is examined.
나. 사실 오인 주장에 관한 판단 피고인은 원심에서도 당 심에서 와 같은 취지의 주장을 하였고, 이에 대하여 원심은, 피해자가 수사기관 이래 원심 법정에 이르기까지 피고인과 이 사건 일시, 장소에서 만 나 몸싸움을 하다가 기절하였는데, 깨어 보니 이마에서 피가 흐르고 있었고, 피고인이 오른손에 벽돌을 들고 있었다는 취지로 진술한 점, 피해자가 당시 피를 많이 흘렸고, 이마의 상처가 깊어 십여 바늘 이상을 꿰매는 치료를 받은 점, 피고인은 수사기관에서 겁이 나서 깨진 벽돌을 들고 도망간 적이 있을 뿐이라고 진술하였으나, 손으로 폭행한 직후 특별한 이유도 없이 벽돌을 들고 도망간다는 것은 쉽사리 납득하기 어려운 점 등 제반 사정에...