강도상해
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than three years and six months.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Legal reasoning is that the upper part of the victim suffered by misunderstanding the legal doctrine is so minor that it can be naturally cured, and thus does not constitute an injury to robbery.
B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (four years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. In regard to the assertion of mistake of fact, the lower court acknowledged the fact that the victim had a large volume of copoper due to the Defendant’s assault, and suffered the upper part of the Defendant’s body due to tearing the drafting, and determined that such circumstance constitutes the injury of robbery.
The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, that is, the police officer dispatched to the site at the time of the instant case appears not to have been somewhat weak to the degree of injury of the victim to the extent that the victim sent the victim to the hospital, and the victim was drinking the face from the defendant several times.
In addition to the statement that the victim did not receive medical treatment of this case was difficult to do so due to the crime of this case (108 pages of evidence), the above judgment of the court below is just, and there is no error of law by misunderstanding the legal principles as argued by the defendant.
Therefore, this part of the defendant's argument is without merit.
B. As to the unlawful assertion of sentencing, the Defendant’s criminal liability is difficult to exempt the Defendant’s criminal liability, if he forcibly takes the room for the Defendant’s unlawful argument of sentencing, such as cash, etc. from the victim who returned home, and during that process, the crime of this case, the nature of the crime, method of the crime, the details of damage, the physical and mental suffering from the crime of this case, and the physical and mental suffering inflicted an injury on the victim.
However, in the trial, the defendant recognized the fact of the crime of this case as a substitute, and shows the misunderstanding.