beta
(영문) 대전지방법원 2016.06.16 2016노699

폭행

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts) is that the Defendant only told the victim and E that they are wraped, and the victim took a bath to the Defendant, and the victim goes beyond his own care.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below which convicted the defendant is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts.

2. Considering the difference between the spirit of the principle of substantial direct deliberation and the method of evaluating the credibility of the first instance court and the appellate court’s determination on the assertion of mistake of facts, the first instance court’s determination on the credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance court was clearly erroneous in light of the contents of the first instance judgment and the evidence duly examined in the first instance court.

Except in exceptional cases where it is deemed significantly unfair to maintain the first instance judgment on the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance court, in full view of the results of the first instance examination and the results of the further examination of evidence conducted until the closing of the appellate trial, the appellate court shall not reverse without permission the first instance judgment on the sole ground that the first instance judgment on the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance court is different from the appellate court’s judgment (see Supreme Court Decision 2006Do4994, Nov. 24, 2006). The following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, namely, (i) the victim has consistently stated the facts of damage to the investigation agency and the court of the lower court up to the date on which the instant case occurred; and (ii) the victim was on the route in which the instant case occurred.

F and H stated in the lower court’s court that the victim and the Defendant were wraped and stated to the effect that they were wraped by the victim, and that they were wraped by the victim, ③ E and G also stated to the effect that they were wraped by the victim in the lower court’s court, ④ immediately after the occurrence of the instant case, the victim was reported to the police, and at the time the police officer