beta
Text
The judgment below
The guilty portion shall be reversed.
Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and ten months.
Seized 2015Nodu4765.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. (1) The lower court found the Defendant not guilty on the grounds that there was no evidence of the crime regarding the facts charged that the Defendant purchased a penphone from D on January 25, 2013 and around January 26, 2013 on the basis of D’s statement at the lower court’s court. However, according to D’s previous investigation agency and court’s statement in the instant case, there was no credibility in D’s legal statement at the lower court, and the facts charged against the Defendant are sufficiently convicted.
Therefore, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts and adversely affecting the judgment.
(2) The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (two years of imprisonment, confiscation, and collection) is too uneased and unreasonable.
B. The lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. The summary of the judgment of the court below regarding the prosecutor's assertion of mistake of facts is as follows.
“A. A. On January 25, 2013, the Defendant purchased 200,000 won from AF container located in Gyeongsung-gun AE, Gosung-gun, D with approximately 10 gal-phones. B. On January 26, 2013, the Defendant purchased 400,000 won from D before D in Gyeongsung-gun, Gosung-gun, G with approximately 20 gal-phones with D with approximately 20 gl-phones. According to evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, in particular, (Evidence No. 19), the protocol of trial (Evidence 20), and a copy of the interrogation of evidence (Evidence No. 42) that D sold al-phones to the Defendant as stated in the facts charged, and it is recognized that D was convicted of the final judgment (Evidence 38, 2013, J. 38, 2013).
On the other hand, D did not sell philophones to the defendant at the time when the defendant was delivered, because it had already lost philophones in the court of original instance, which had been tried to sell to the defendant at the same time and at the same place as above.
This case is investigated by the police.