1. A substantial causal relationship;

2. Principles of improper accusation (limited to the extent that adjudication may be conducted without changes in indictment);

1. In a case where the victim died of her inter-livering transfusion one time, there is no substantial causal relationship between the Defendant’s assault and the victim’s death, barring special circumstances, unless there are special circumstances.

2. With respect to a case prosecuted by a prosecutor as a crime of bodily injury, even if the court recognizes the crime of assault without the prosecutor’s written indictment modification and accused the prosecutor, it does not violate the principle of no accusation.

Article 17 of the Criminal Act, Article 298 of the Criminal Procedure Act

Supreme Court Decision 67Do1079 delivered on September 26, 1967, 68Do106 delivered on February 18, 1969, 70Do2216 delivered on January 12, 197, 73Do1256 delivered on July 24, 197 (Supreme Court Decision 21Do10516 delivered on July 24, 197, Supreme Court Decision 21Do256 delivered on July 24, 197, Article 254(36), Article 251 of the Criminal Procedure Act, Article 471 delivered on the summary of the decision, Article 78Do1961 delivered on November 28, 1978 (Supreme Court Decision 12032 delivered on July 12, 1969, Article 263-111 of the Supreme Court Decision, Article 262(14)163 delivered on July 14, 1963).

Defendant

Prosecutor

Busan District Court Msan Branch Court (64Da362)

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

One hundred and eighteen days of detention prior to the pronouncement of the judgment of the court below shall be included in the original sentence.

Provided, That the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date of the final decision.

The gist of the appeal by the public prosecutor is that the above facts were affected by the judgment, and the defendant's summary of the facts charged is the victim's non-indicted 2's non-indicted 2's non-indicted 2's non-indicted 3's statement that he had been working for the defendant at the right time of his residence and who was living for the defendant (the non-indicted 2's non-indicted 3's non-indicted 2's non-indicted 4's non-indicted 2's non-indicted 2's non-indicted 9's non-indicted 2's non-indicted 4's non-indicted 2's non-indicted 2's non-indicted 6's non-indicted 2's non-indicted 2's non-indicted 2's non-indicted 3's non-indicted 2's non-indicted 3's non-indicted 2's non-indicted's non-indicted 2's non-indicted 2's non-indicted 2's non-indicted 2's non-indicted 2's non-indicted 3's non-2's non-indicted 9's non-2's non-indicted.

Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act provides that a defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for up to 8 months within the term of punishment chosen by imprisonment among the above prescribed penal amounts, and Article 37 of the same Act provides that 118 days of the number of detention prior to the pronouncement of the judgment of the court below shall be included in the above principal sentence according to Article 37 of the same Act, and the defendant, as the first offender, shall be included in the above principal sentence, and it is reasonable to postpone the execution of the sentence to the defendant who comprehensively takes into account the motive and other circumstances shown in the records of the crime as mentioned above. Thus, applying Article 62 of the Criminal Act, Article 321 of the Criminal Procedure Act, Article 321 of the Criminal Procedure

It is so decided as per Disposition with the above reasons.

Judges Kim Young-ro (Presiding Judge)