beta
Text
Defendant
All appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendant 1’s insult of the misunderstanding of facts) was found on September 15, 2018 by the Defendant to find the victim C’s house on September 15, 2018, but the Defendant did not publicly insult the victim C by taking a desire as stated in the facts charged.
Since each statement of the victim C and D, which correspond to the facts charged, falls short of credibility, it is insufficient to recognize it as evidence of guilt.
B) The Defendant’s use of violence does not have her her her son at two times, and rather, in the process of responding to the assault from the victim C and defending the victim C, the victim C was her son. The victim C and H’s statement that correspond to the facts charged are insufficient to be considered as evidence of guilt as there is no credibility. C) The Defendant’s her sleep continued in the victim F’s house on October 26, 2018, and there was no fact that the victim F was her son by drinking.
The statements made by the victim F and H, who correspond to the facts charged, are difficult to believe.
2) At the time of each of the instant crimes, the Defendant was in the state of mental and physical disability due to drinking. 3) The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (two months of imprisonment and order to attend school) is too unreasonable.
B. The Prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court is too unhued and unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. 1) Determination of the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts is based on the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court, and comprehensive consideration of the following facts and circumstances, the Defendant may be recognized that the Defendant publicly insultinged the victim C by taking a bath as stated in the facts charged. A) The victim C consistently from the investigative agency to the lower court’s court, and consistently, from September 22:15, 2018, the Defendant found the victim at home and expressed that he had expressed the same desire as indicated in the facts charged.
B. On the CCTV installed in front of the victim C's house on September 15, 2018, the Defendant was exposed to the door door door of the victim C on September 22:15, 2018, and on the same day at around 22:18, the victim C's male letter.