beta
Text
All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. In fact, Defendant B made an investment in the victim but attempted to verify the documents related to the victim’s abstinence by suffering a loss equivalent to KRW 1.3 billion. The Defendants did not commit an assault against the victim as stated in paragraph 1 of the lower judgment, and the Defendants did not have the intent to assault the victim.
B. The Defendants’ act of assault as stated in the lower judgment by misapprehending the legal doctrine constitutes a legitimate act that does not go against social norms.
(c)
The sentence of the court below which is unfair in sentencing (one million won per fine) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. Determination as to the assertion of mistake of facts 1) As to the crime of assault, the term "Assault" means the exercise of physical tangible force against a human body, so it does not necessarily require any contact with the victim's body, and thus, it was not directly contacted with the victim's body in the event that he/she took a bath near the victim, as he/she would put the victim into contact with his/her body as he/she takes a bath.
Even if the court below duly adopted and examined the evidence, it constitutes an assault as an exercise of unlawful tangible force against the victim (see Supreme Court Decision 89Do1406, Feb. 13, 1990); and even if the act was committed by placing an article with an article, it constitutes an assault as an exercise of tangible force against the body of a person (see Supreme Court Decision 90Do1596, Sept. 25, 1990). 2) The following circumstances are acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below. i.e.,, the victim: (a) during the investigation agency from the victim to the court of the court of the court of the court below, the victim was on the front line of the Karen car operated by G, on the back line of the victim and the defendant A, who was on the front line of the victim and the defendant A, also considered as having been placed in order to open an advanced bank over the victim's arms.
specifically stated that the vehicle has been driving at that time.
G also told the Defendants to commit the act that she would bring about the victim's abundance.