logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 2013.04.11 2012도14579
상해
Text

The appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. The record reveals the following facts.

① The original facts charged in the instant case were to the effect that “the Defendant, by putting the head debt of C and D, scam and brought about the face of C and D, about two weeks to C and D, with approximately three weeks’ face.”

② At the third trial date of the first instance trial, D testified that it is not possible to face as a witness, the prosecutor made an oral application for changes in the indictment to delete the part of “D’s face” from among the above facts charged, and the first instance court granted permission with the consent of the defendant and his defense counsel.

③ However, the first instance court rendered a judgment of conviction on the whole facts charged before the modification of the indictment, with an excessive restriction on the modification of indictment as above.

④ The lower court accepted the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts, and reversed the first instance judgment on the ground that it is difficult to recognize the fact that the Defendant “in the face of the victim D, satisfying satisfy, etc. requiring treatment for about three weeks,” but found the Defendant guilty of the criminal facts constituting “in the course of satisfying the victim D’s head debt by satisfying.” The part of the criminal facts of the judgment is the same as indicated in the corresponding column of the first instance judgment, except for the alteration of “in the face of C and D by hand” to “in the face of C in his hand” among the criminal facts of the first instance judgment, and applied the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act as to the criminal facts of the victim D by applying Article 257(1) of the Criminal Act.

Furthermore, the part of the facts charged that “in his/her hand, he/she caused hump to D in need of approximately three weeks of treatment,” is acquitted without proof of a crime, but it is so long as it is found guilty of the rest of the injury to the victim D who has a single crime.

arrow