beta
Text
The judgment below
Of those, the conviction against Defendant A shall be reversed.
Defendant
A shall be punished by a fine of KRW 5,000,000.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendants (the part of the crime) 1 did not have any false fact that the Defendants were assaulted by C or D, but the Defendants were aware that knee, etc. was inflicted with knee, etc. due to the assault, so it cannot be said that there was an intention of false accusation. 2) The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendants (the fine of KRW 5 million) is too unreasonable.
B. The prosecutor (not guilty part against Defendant A) acknowledged that there was no credibility in Defendant A’s statement in the case of injury to Defendant B. In light of the objective circumstances at the time of the above case, Defendant A was highly likely to witness the face of the upper defendant B, but there was an error in the misapprehension of the judgment of the court below that acquitted Defendant A of perjury among the facts charged against Defendant A.
2. According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below, Defendant A was sentenced to four months of imprisonment with prison labor or two years of suspension of execution at the Daegu District Court on August 14, 2018 and the above judgment became final and conclusive on January 18, 2019. The crime of the crime of the court below and the above assault crime of the defendant, which became final and conclusive on January 18, 2019, are concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and should be sentenced to a punishment against Defendant A in consideration of equity with the case where the judgment is to be rendered simultaneously pursuant to the former part of Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act. However
In this respect, the conviction part of the judgment of the court below against Defendant A could not be maintained as it is.
However, among the judgment below, the defendants' assertion of misunderstanding of facts against the guilty portion, the prosecutor's assertion of misunderstanding of facts about the acquittal portion against the defendant A, and the defendant B's assertion of unreasonable sentencing is still subject to the judgment of this court.
3. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts
A. Defendants’ assertion of misunderstanding of facts is examined.