logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2019.06.27 2018노2724
폭행
Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The sentence of sentence against the defendant shall be suspended.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The judgment of the court below which accepted only the victim's statement even though the defendant did not assault the victim, and found the defendant guilty by mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles.

B. The Defendant assaulted the victim even if socially accepted facts

Even if it does not violate social rules, illegality is excluded.

C. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (the fine of KRW 500,000) is excessively unreasonable.

2. Determination:

A. As to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, the lower court, however, determined that the Defendant abused the victim on the grounds of the circumstances stated in its reasoning.

In light of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the judgment of the court below is just, and it is hard to see that there was a mistake of mistake or misapprehension of the legal principles.

B. As to the assertion of social rules, Article 20 of the Criminal Act provides that “no act contrary to social rules shall be punished.” The concept of social rules is stipulated as the basis for determining the most basic illegality. According to such provision, even if the act appears to fall under the element of crime under the language and text of the law, its illegality may not be dismissed and punished only in cases where it appears to be within the scope of historical social order created as one of the most common living forms (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 82Do357, Feb. 8, 1983). Even in this case, even if the act appears to fall under the element of crime under the category of crime under the language and text of the provision of the law, its illegality may not be found (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 82Do357, Feb

In light of the aforementioned circumstances, the Defendant’s act is normal in light of the method and degree of assault.

arrow