logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2019.11.26 2018노842
마약류관리에관한법률위반(향정)등
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal (defendants: misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, and unreasonable sentencing)

A. The prosecutor’s statement of misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles in the prosecution cannot be found guilty of the facts charged solely with the evidence presented in the judgment below, such as misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles that “the contents stated in the police” are without any specification, and its credibility is doubtful, and other F’s legal statements, C’s police statements, and other investigation reports.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous.

In addition, even if there are some false facts in the report referred to in B, it is irrelevant to the establishment of the crime, and thus cannot constitute a false crime. The defendant's statement that the victim "not by her own" was made to the victim for the purpose of asserting in advance that the victim did not have any intention to administer narcotics, and it was not for the purpose of having C punished, and therefore, it is not for the purpose of having C receive criminal punishment

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the crime of false accusation among the facts charged in the instant case.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court (one year of imprisonment, etc.) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the following circumstances, which can be recognized by the lower court’s judgment and the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court of first instance as to the assertion of mistake of facts, the lower court’s determination that recognized the criminal facts as stated in its reasoning is justifiable, and thus, it is not acceptable to accept the Defendant

① In the prosecutorial investigation, B made a consistent statement that corresponds to the facts charged on the part of the Defendant and F’s philopon delivery part, rather than being forced to make a statement on one’s own and forced to take a philopon medication, by ensuring that the Defendant and F were subject to punishment.

arrow