beta
Text
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,000,000.
The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.
Reasons
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is erroneous in the misapprehension of the judgment of the court below which convicted the defendant, misunderstanding that the defendant did not exercise assault against the victim as stated in the facts charged in this case, and thereby affected the conclusion of the judgment.
2. On February 16, 2012, according to the records of this case, the Defendant was sentenced to two years of imprisonment with prison labor for the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties, etc. by the Daegu District Court on February 16, 2012, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on February 24, 2012. As such, the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties, etc., for which the judgment became final and conclusive as well as the crime of this case are concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and the crime of this case is at the same time decided in accordance with Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act, taking into account equity and taking into account
However, the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding of facts is still subject to the judgment of this court, despite the above reasons for ex officio reversal.
3. The court below's decision on the assertion of mistake of facts is basically respected, since each of the above witnesses' statements made to F, G, and E is judged to be credibility in light of not only the reasonableness, logic, contradiction, or rule of experience of each witness's statement itself, but also the appearance and attitude of the witnesses who are being sworn in the open court after being sworn in the presence of a judge, but also the fact-finding evidences that have been gained by directly observing various circumstances, such as the pen's appearance and attitude, and the penance of the statements, etc., which are being made in the public court after being sworn in the presence of a judge, but also the above witnesses' statements made to F, G, and E are specific and consistent in the main part from the investigative agency to the court of the court of the court below.