beta
Text
Defendant
A All appeals filed against the Defendants by the Prosecutor and the Prosecutor are dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendant A (misunderstanding of facts with regard to the guilty portion of the lower judgment) did not commit an injury by assaulting a victim, such as the statement in the facts charged.
B. A prosecutor (1) misunderstanding of facts (as to the acquittal portion of the judgment of the court below), it is difficult to believe that the change of the defendant C and B is inconsistent, and rather, it is consistent with the victim's investigative agencies and the court of the court below's major parts of the statements, and H and I's statements are also consistent with the victim's statements, and their credibility is recognized. However, the court below rejected the credibility of the victim's statements and found the defendants not guilty of the violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint injury) by rejecting the credibility of the above victim's statements, there is
(2) The lower court’s sentence (a fine of 300,000 won) is too unhued and unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. In light of the following circumstances, which can be recognized by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below as to Defendant A’s assertion of mistake of facts, i.e., ① the victim has consistently made a statement from the investigative agency about the facts assaulted by the Defendant, ② the part of the injury, etc. described in the written diagnosis of injury (see, e.g., 89 of the investigation record) also correspond to the victim’s statement, ② the Defendant and the victim’s body fighting, such as scarbling and smuggling, appears to be true (see, e.g., Article 61 of the investigation record). In full view of the police statements made by the above Defendant B, it can be sufficiently recognized that the Defendant inflicted an injury on the victim as described in the facts charged, and this part
B. As to the prosecutor’s assertion of misunderstanding of facts against the Defendants (1) (A) the lower court, which is acknowledged by the record, is the first police on October 7, 201, immediately after the instant case.