beta
Text
The judgment below
The part against Defendant B is reversed, and this part is remanded to the District Court for Goyang.
Reasons
1. The lower court rendered a judgment that dismissed the prosecution against Defendant A and that convicted Defendant A of the injury to Defendant A and obstruction of the performance of official duties.
Defendant
A, with respect to the above guilty portion, the prosecutor appealed against the guilty part of the judgment against the defendant A and the judgment against the defendant B.
Therefore, since the dismissal of prosecution in the judgment against Defendant A is separated or finalized, it shall be excluded from the scope of the judgment of this court.
2. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendant A’s imprisonment (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
B. Prosecutor 1) The lower court’s sentence against Defendant A is too unthrupted and unfair. 2) The Defendant B heard the desire from the victim A and contacted Defendant B, and two were to search for the victim A’s house. Defendant B did not restrain I while committing an assault against the victim A, such as provokinging the victim’s back, etc., and rather expressed the victim A’s desire to “I am dead and dead, taking advantage of this brut and brut,” and in light of the aforementioned circumstances, even if I did not exercise the direct force against the victim A, it can be acknowledged that Defendant B and I assaulted the victim A in collaboration with the victim.
Nevertheless, the lower court dismissed the prosecution against Defendant B on the ground that Defendant B had the intent of not to punish the victim, on the premise that only a simple assault can be established against Defendant B, on the ground that it is difficult to view that Defendant B used the victim’s desire to commit assault against the victim A as it is difficult for the lower court to view that Defendant B used the victim’s desire to commit assault against the victim A.
Therefore, the judgment of the court below is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles as to "joint assault" in violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, which affected the conclusion of judgment.
3. A prosecutor;