beta
Text
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendant
A, B, D, E, H, and I shall be punished by a fine of 50,000 won, and Defendant C shall be punished by a fine of 70,000 won.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. As to the facts charged in this part of the facts charged, the defendants shall leave from N or P to the point of violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (i.e., joint withdrawal).
There was no fact that the Defendants received the Gu, and even if the Defendants were to leave
Even if the Gu received the Gu and it is recognized that the violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint withdrawal) as of August 9, 201 against the Defendants, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendants guilty of the violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint withdrawal) as of August 10, 201 and the violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint withdrawal) as of August 10, 201 against Defendant A, B, C, H, E, and G, is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles, or in the misapprehension of legal principles, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.
The defendants were not confined to theO, and the O was the head of the association, and the defendant who is a member of the association. However, the judgment of the court below which recognized the crime of violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint confinement) by misunderstanding the facts and affected the conclusion of the judgment.
Defendant A, B, and C did not commit violence or intimidation in violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, and each written indictment was voluntarily prepared by N according to N’s arbitration. However, the judgment of the court below that recognized the above Defendants as a crime of violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint coercion) is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.
x) Defendant F, C, D, and I merely made an objection to theO, and even though they did not make an abusive opinion to theO as stated in the judgment of the court below, the judgment of the court below that recognized the offense of insult against the above Defendants is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.
B. The lower court’s judgment on the Defendants on the grounds of unfair sentencing.