폭력행위등처벌에관한법률위반(집단ㆍ흉기등상해)등
The judgment of the first instance court shall be reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year for each crime listed in the judgment of the first instance.
The second instance.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The Defendant was in a mental and physical state by drinking at the time of committing the crime as stated in the judgment of the first instance court (as to the first instance court).
B. The original sentence (the first instance court: imprisonment with prison labor for 1 year and 6 months, and the second instance court: imprisonment with prison labor for 6 months) against the accused is too unreasonable.
2. Determination:
A. Although the first and second judgments of the court below were consolidated in the first and second trials against the defendant as to whether the defendant is a concurrent offender, the crime of violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a collective crime, a deadly weapon, etc.) in the judgment of the court of first instance in the judgment of the court of first instance (hereinafter referred to as "final judgment") is one of the concurrent crimes in the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and as to the crime of violation in the latter part of Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act is one of the concurrent crimes in accordance with Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act. On the other hand, the crime of the second judgment in the judgment of the court of second instance is one of the crimes after the final judgment of the court of first instance and Article 37
B. According to the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court below on the judgment of the first instance court (the judgment of the court below as to the judgment of the first instance court), the defendant was under investigation by the police after the crime, and was unable to properly memory the crime of this case under the influence of alcohol, and failed to make a proper statement even after being investigated by the prosecutor's office, the victims also led to the confession of the fact that the defendant was not the victims, and made a statement that the defendant committed the crime of this case. Accordingly, according to this, the defendant appears to have committed the crime of this case under the lack of the ability to discern things or make decisions at the time of the crime of this case. Thus, the defendant's assertion is with merit.
C. The Defendant is dissatisfied with the judgment of the second instance.