업무방해등
The judgment below
The guilty portion shall be reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.
1. As to the insult of the victim C among the facts charged in the instant case, the lower court dismissed the public prosecution on the grounds that the said victim voluntarily withdrawn the complaint after the prosecution, and sentenced the Defendant to a punishment of one-year imprisonment, recognizing the remainder of the facts charged as guilty.
As to the above judgment of the court below, only the defendant appealed against the guilty portion, and accordingly the dismissal part of the above public prosecution which was not appealed by both the defendant and the prosecutor became final and conclusive, the scope of the judgment of this court is limited to the guilty part of the
2. Summary of reasons for appeal;
A. Unlike the facts charged in the instant case, the Defendant did not interfere with the work of the victims, and did not take a bath against the police officer.
Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below that recognized the crime of obstruction of business and insult against the defendant is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.
B. Even if the sentencing is found to be guilty against the defendant, the sentence of the lower court (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
3. Determination
A. 1) Determination of the victim’s statement supporting the facts charged is based on the credibility of the victim’s statement, not only on whether the content of the statement itself conforms to the rationality, logical contradiction, or empirical rule, or conforms to the witness evidence or third party’s statement, but also on the witness appearance and attitude of the witness who is being sworn in the open court after being sworn before a judge, and on the witness examination protocol, such as the penance of the statement, which is difficult to record, by directly observing various circumstances that are difficult to record, the credibility of the statement should be assessed (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2008Do7917, Jan. 30, 2009; 2012Do2631, Jun. 28, 2012). If the statement is consistent with the major part of the statement, it is somewhat somewhat small in the statement on other minor matters.