beta
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2018.11.22 2018노500

상해

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of 1.5 million won.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant’s act constitutes a legitimate defense or a legitimate act, since the victimized person gets a trial and gets the Defendant to take the Defendant’s hand, and the Defendant only spreaded the victim.

The CCTV investigation data of the police is not related to the whole case of the defendant and the victim, but also compiled disadvantageous to the defendant.

B. The injury of the victim is not caused by the Defendant’s act.

(c)

The sentencing of the lower court (an amount of KRW 3 million) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In determining the facts charged of the injury, the images of the subway non-wide CCTV images taken by the Defendant and the victim as objective evidence of the instant case are new ones.

According to the written reply to the police officer's factual inquiry of the police officer in charge submitted in the trial, the police officer in charge taken CCTV images on his/her cell phone camera while the defendant and the victim have taken all the parts appearing on the screen because there is a risk of deletion between them in order to store them with the approval of the public in light of the characteristics of the CCTV system. There is no reason to suspect that CCTV images were taken and submitted only a part of them.

In view of the above video, even if there was a dispute between the defendant and the victim, and even if it was displayed on the screen, the commencement of the case or all actions have not been taken. However, it seems that the defendant's assaulted, such as plucking and plucking up the victim's neck and plucking, etc., and it seems that the victim could not have a defendant, but it does not appear that the victim was fluoring the victim's vision or causing violence to the victim.

In full view of the statements of the victim's investigative agency and the photographs taken by the victim at the time, the fact that the defendant assaults the victim like the facts charged is recognized.