폭력행위등처벌에관한법률위반(공동상해)
All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The Defendants did not jointly commit violence against the victim, since those employed by the victim G group of the misunderstanding of facts (the believerss of the group that directly established the meeting) left the victim's personal injury, etc. and the victim was pushed down under the stairs, and the Defendants did not jointly attract the victim.
(B) there was no intention to co-processing.
The Defendants, even if misunderstanding the legal principles, led the victims to the stairs.
Even if the victim did not commit an assault, such as taking the head of the defendant D or breaking his shoulder and shoulder, which constitutes a self-defense under the Criminal Act, an emergency escape, or a legitimate act, and thus, is not unlawful.
C. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the grounds of unreasonable sentencing (the Defendant’s each fine of KRW 700,000) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. (1) Determination of the assertion of mistake of facts (1) Article 2(2) of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act requires that the phrase “two or more persons jointly share” requires that there exists a so-called co-offender relationship among them, and that there is a case where several persons are aware of another person’s crime in the same opportunity and used it in the same place.
(Supreme Court Decision 9Do4305 delivered on February 25, 2000). On the other hand, the co-principal under Article 30 of the Criminal Act is jointly committing a crime by two or more persons, and the offender’s intent of co-processing is subjective requirements. However, the intent of co-processing is one of the parties to engage in a specific criminal act, and the intent of co-processing is one of the parties and the awareness of the co-processing to move to the execution of one’s own intent. The intent of the co-processing is common sense, and it does not necessarily require any kind of mother process in advance.
(Supreme Court Decision 2004Do4437 delivered on October 28, 2004). (2) Comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, such as the murderer and CD screen submitted by the victim G, etc.