beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The Defendant alleged a mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles in the name of the Defendant, who sold a name tag to the Defendant, put the convenience pattern of this case, which was formally attached to the Defendant, into a restaurant, and displayed it for the purpose of sale. The portion of the testimony of the lower court witness E, which seems consistent with the facts charged in the instant case, concerning A’s statement, among the testimony of the witness E, is inadmissible as a professional statement.
Nevertheless, the lower court found the Defendant guilty by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal doctrine.
B. The lower court’s sentence of an unreasonable sentencing (fine 1,00,000) against the Defendant is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. The evidence duly adopted and examined at the court below's decision on the assertion of mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, namely, the witness E's legal statement (this part of the part concerning A's statement is the full statement as provided by Article 316 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is not admissible as it is impossible for A, who is the original person, to make a statement due to death, disease, foreign residence, unknown whereabouts, or any other similar cause, and its statement was made under particularly reliable circumstances, since it is not admissible as it is not proved that it was made under particularly reliable circumstances). In full view of the records of seizure and the list of seizure, and the images of each photograph (in particular, new photograph and a photograph, the convenience ideology of which is recorded together with a clear statement), it can be sufficiently recognized that the defendant displayed "convenition" together with a clear statement, and thus, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case is just and there is no error of law by misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles as alleged by the defendant.
B. The background and method leading up to the instant crime, the record of punishment, and other Defendant’s age, career, and experience.