beta
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2015.09.17 2015노303

폭력행위등처벌에관한법률위반(집단ㆍ흉기등폭행)등

Text

The judgment below

Of them, the part on Defendant B shall be reversed.

Defendant

B A person shall be punished by imprisonment for a year and six months.

(2).

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant B (1) 1) misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles did not have any assaulted Category C as recorded in the facts charged, and Defendant B did not have instigated the victim H, I, and L, who is a subsequent distribution, to commit an injury. Nevertheless, the lower court convicted the Defendant of this part of the facts charged. The lower court erred by misapprehending the facts or misapprehending the legal principles, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment. 2) Imprisonment (one year and six months) sentenced by the lower court of unfair sentencing (one year and six months) is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant A1) misunderstanding of facts is limited to only the fact when he was her hand off with B and M’s her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her with

2. Determination

A. Determination 1 on Defendant B’s assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles also asserted the same purport as the grounds for appeal, and the lower court rejected this decision. According to the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court, the lower court’s determination rejecting the above argument by the above Defendant and finding the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged is justified, and even based on the statement at A’s trial court, it does not interfere with the recognition of the above facts charged, and there is no other evidence to reverse it. Therefore, the above Defendant B’s assertion of unreasonable sentencing is without merit, and there is no doubt as to whether Defendant B had the history of punishment several times as a crime of violent inclinations, and there is a serious violation against the crime of this case.