beta
(영문) 부산고등법원 2017.11.29 2017노534

강도상해등

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In addition to the facts charged, the Defendant did not misleads the victim E or steals his/her property, as stated in this part of the facts charged.

Even if the defendant was deadly aware of the victim E;

Even if so, the victim suffered injury identical to the facts charged.

shall not be deemed to exist.

The judgment of the court below which found all of the facts charged guilty on the basis of the statements made by the victim E with no credibility is erroneous by misapprehending the legal principles or misapprehending the legal principles.

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (one year and four months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts and legal principles, the Defendant also asserted the same as the grounds for appeal.

In full view of the facts and circumstances as stated in its reasoning, the lower court rejected the Defendant’s assertion on the ground that the victim E’s investigative agency and the lower court’s legal statement that conforms to each of the facts charged are reliable, the Defendant committed a theft of cash and mobile phone by cutting the victim E, and that the Defendant’s assertion constitutes injury as referred to in the crime of injury on the part of the Defendant. The lower court convicted all of the facts charged.

According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below, the circumstances as stated in the judgment below are recognized, and the court below has credibility in the victim E investigation agency and the court below's legal statement based on these circumstances.

There is an obvious fault in determining the judgment

There is no circumstance to view (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2008Do7917, Jan. 30, 2009). The court below is just in holding that all of the charges of injury and theft of this case are guilty on the grounds as stated in its holding, taking into account the victim E’s investigation agency and the court below’s legal statement, injury diagnosis, and treatment details received by victim E.