beta
Text
The judgment below
Of them, the part on Defendant B shall be reversed.
Defendant
B The Prosecutor’s appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor of mistake of facts against Defendant A, Defendant A could recognize the fact that Defendant A inflicted an injury on the victim B, and there is an error of misconception of the fact that the court below acquitted Defendant A on the part of the injury. 2) The illegality of mistake of unjust sentencing against Defendant A has influenced the sentencing. As such, the punishment of fine of KRW 500,000,000, which the court below sentenced, is too unreasonable.
B. Defendant B (1) misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles as a matter of returning down payment, Defendant B (i.e., Defendant B) got away from the inevitable course in order to remove the passage of the Defendant B, which was at the time of leaving a satis on the bridge and examining satis on the bridge, and did not have any intention to interfere with A’s business. Although such act of Defendant B constitutes obstruction of business, it is difficult to view that Defendant B’s act constitutes force beyond the scope permitted by social norms, and therefore, Defendant B’s act constitutes a violation of law by misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment. (ii) Even if an unreasonable sentencing is found against Defendant B, even if it is found that Defendant B was guilty on the ground of unjust sentencing, it is unfair to view that Defendant B’s act constitutes obstruction of business by visiting Defendant B’s office.
2. Judgment on the prosecutor's assertion
A. The following circumstances, which are acknowledged by the lower court and the first instance court’s duly adopted and examined the evidence in regard to the assertion of mistake of facts, i.e., ① as to the part that Defendant A laid down the title B, and laid down the head of a bar, Defendant A and B’s statement were inconsistent with the statements of Defendant A and B. However, the statement of the witness J, which conforms to the statements of Defendant B, was made by Defendant A, was written.