beta
(영문) 청주지방법원 2019.08.22 2019노41

폭행

Text

1. Of the judgment of the court below, the guilty part against Defendant A and the part against Defendant B shall be reversed.

2. The defendant.

Reasons

1. (In the indictment against Defendant A), the lower court dismissed the prosecution as to the assault against the victim C among the facts charged against Defendant A, and sentenced each of the convictions as to the assault against the victim D. Since only the Defendant appealed with respect to the guilty part of the lower judgment, the dismissal of prosecution without appeal by the Defendant and the prosecutor was separated and finalized as it is.

Therefore, the scope of this court's trial is limited to the guilty part of the judgment of the court below (for Defendant A).

2. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles 1) Defendant A only gave the victim D his head, and did not commit an assault against the victim. Even if the Defendant committed an assault against the victim D, as stated in the facts charged in this case, it constitutes legitimate self-defense or legitimate act. 2) Defendant B merely committed an unilaterally assault from D and did not commit an assault against D.

3) Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which convicted all the Defendants who believe the false statements made by D and E and C, the perpetrator, as they are, is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts or in the misapprehension of legal principles, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment. However, even if the facts of assault by the Defendants are acknowledged, considering the developments of the instant case and the degree of damage inflicted on the Defendants, the court below’s sentence (Defendant A: KRW 1 million, and KRW 700,000,000,000,000,000 won) is too unreasonable.

3. Determination on Defendant A’s grounds for appeal

A. As to the assertion of mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, the court below rejected the defendant's assertion based on the facts and circumstances as stated in its reasoning. We examine the above judgment of the court below in comparison with records and closely.