logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2018.02.01 2017노3397
상해등
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

With respect to the charge of injury among the facts charged in the case No. 595, misunderstanding the gist of the grounds for appeal and misunderstanding the legal principles, the Defendant was only aware of the fact that G attempted to prevent access of the victim by forcing the victim to release the Defendant from the emergency room in the F Hospital, and that the Defendant did not inflict injury on the victim by breaking the breath of the victim’s chest with her hand and her head, such as this part of the charges.

Of the facts charged in the case No. 595 of the High Order 2017, as to obstructing the performance of official duties among the facts charged in the case, the police officers did not investigate the gambling and resist it. However, the police officers threatened the defendant by the lock, and attempted to illegally arrest the defendant as a flagrant offender without notice of the domination principle, and did not assault the police officer as stated in this part of the facts charged.

In relation to the facts charged in the case No. 1285 of the Highest 2017, the defendant resisted the defendant to refuse to give medical treatment to the defendant and dialogueed about ten minutes with the above nurse, and there was no interference with the medical treatment of emergency medical service workers, such as this part of the facts charged.

Nevertheless, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles and thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment, which found all of the charges guilty.

The punishment sentenced by the court below (two years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

In fact, the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court regarding the injury among the facts charged in the instant case No. 2017 Go-dan 595, the lower court’s determination on the mistake of facts and misapprehension of the legal doctrine, namely, the victim G consistently stated that “the Defendant was injured by satisfing his satch, satisfing his chest by hand and head,” and the employee AU of the F Hospital’s staff.

arrow