beta
Text
The judgment below
Of them, the part against Defendant A shall be reversed.
Defendant
A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for one year.
except that this shall not apply.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor (not guilty part of the judgment of the court below against Defendant A) based on erroneous determination of facts (not guilty part of the judgment of the court below), the fact that Defendant A inflicted bodily injury on the part of the victim I’s head at the time of two times by parking, which is a dangerous object at around 07:40 on March 18, 2012. The court below erred in the misapprehension of facts. 2) The sentence (8 months of imprisonment and two years of suspended execution) sentenced by the court of unfair sentencing to Defendant A by the court of unfair sentencing (not guilty part of the judgment of the court below) is too uneasible.
B. Defendant B’s punishment (a fine of KRW 5 million) sentenced by the lower court to Defendant B is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. Of the judgment of the court below, the part 1 of the judgment of the court below against Defendant A was the first instance court for the judgment of ex officio, while maintaining the facts charged with not guilty of Defendant A as the primary facts charged, the name of the crime "violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (collectively weapons, etc.)", "Article 3 (1) and Article 2 (1) 1 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, and Article 283 (1) of the Criminal Act" in the applicable provisions of the Act, and "an application for amendment to a bill of amendment that adds the same contents as the facts charged in the facts charged," and since this court permitted this and changed the subject of the judgment by this court, the part against Defendant A among the judgment of the court below was no longer maintained. However, the prosecutor's assertion of facts as to the primary facts charged is still subject to the judgment of the court of this court, regardless of the above reasons for ex officio reversal, and this is examined as follows."
Defendant
A has parking spaces (100 cm in length, 20 cm in length, 20 cm in height, 20 cm in height) which are dangerous objects in a building.