beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The judgment of the court below that found the Defendant guilty of all the facts charged of this case even though it did not constitute the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties because the Defendant did not assault the victim jointly with C, and there was a suppression of force by police officers at the time, was erroneous and adversely affected the conclusion of the judgment.
B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (fine 2.5 million won) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. First of all of the determination on the assertion of mistake of facts, the phrase "when two or more persons jointly commit the crime under paragraph (1)" as to the violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint assault) requires that there exists a so-called co-offender relationship between them. They require that several persons are aware of another person's crime in the same opportunity at the same place and commit the crime using it (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 99Do4305, Feb. 25, 2000). In full view of the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, the facts that there was a dispute between the defendant and the F, and the facts that C used a fighting, while it was evident that there was a mere fighting match, and there was no objective material supporting the defendant's defense that the court below merely made a fighting, and therefore, it is justified in the judgment of the court below that the defendant recognized the crime under the same opportunity as co-offender C and inflicted injury on F by using it.
Next, in light of the background leading up to the arrest of the Defendant, which was acknowledged by the lower court by integrating the evidence of guilt, such as health stand, L’s partial statement, etc. as to the obstruction of the performance of official duties, the degree of the police officer’s force in the process, and the degree and method of the Defendant’s act, the arrest of the Defendant in the act of committing the crime against the police officer is legitimate