beta
Text
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The summary of the charge of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles is as follows: “The defendant sent home protection case to Busan District Prosecutors’ Office on February 26, 2019 due to assault, and was subject to a disposition of transfer of home protection case to the victim C (the 39 years old) by assault in the same prosecutors’ office on April 29, 2019, and was 8 times or more due to the violent crime against the victim C (the 39 years old) who is the wife. The defendant used the victim at the defendant’s home on July 6:20, 2019, on the ground that he expressed the victim’s desire while drinking and drinking, and habitually abused the victim by drinking his hand on the ground that he expressed the victim’s desire while drinking.
The court below found the Defendant guilty of the crime of assault in this case, on the ground that it is difficult to view that the Defendant’s crime of assault in this case was caused by the realization of the force of violence inherent in the Defendant, without any reasonable doubt, and found the Defendant guilty of the crime of habitual assault in this case. The court below erred by misapprehending the facts and misapprehending the legal principles, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.
B. The sentence (one million won of a fine) imposed by the court below on the defendant is too uneasible and unfair.
2. The court below rejected the prosecutor's assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of the legal principles on the same assertion as the above grounds for appeal, and the court below rejected the prosecutor's assertion in the judgment and acquitted the above charged facts.
Examining the judgment of the court below closely after comparison with the records, the court below found the defendant not guilty of the facts charged on the ground that it is not sufficient to recognize that the crime of assault in this case by the prosecutor alone was caused by the realization of a reasonable doubt that the crime of assault in this case was committed by the defendant inherent in the defendant.