(영문) 대구지방법원 2017.11.03 2016노2966 | 리걸엔진

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 대구지방법원 2017.11.03 2016노2966

폭행

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of 200,000 won.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The court below's judgment convicting the victim of the document by misunderstanding the facts or misunderstanding the legal principles is erroneous in misapprehending the facts or misunderstanding the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment, although it constitutes a legitimate defense as a defense against the victim's assault.

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (the penalty amount of KRW 500,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The lower court also asserted the same purport as the grounds for appeal, and the lower court rejected the Defendant’s allegation in detail by stating in detail the judgment on the Defendant’s assertion.

Examining the judgment of the court below closely after comparison with the records, it is justified to view that the act of the defendant taking the document files toward the victim by standing above the limit of passive defense against the victim's unfair attack, and thus does not constitute a legitimate defense. In so doing, it is reasonable to view that the act does not constitute a legitimate defense. In so doing, it did not err by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, thereby affecting

Therefore, the defendant's mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles is without merit.

B. The fact that the defendant did not agree with the victim to determine the unfair argument of sentencing, and the defendant committed the instant crime even though he had the record of the same kind of crime, is disadvantageous.

However, while the crime of this case was committed by the victim who had been at the hospital as the principal director and staff of the hospital and the guardian of the defendant and the patient, the defendant was forced to take care of his office, but the victim took a bath and took documents, and in the process, the defendant was also injured by the victim's assault, and the victim's damage caused by the crime of this case seems to be relatively minor.

The defendant and the defendant, including the above circumstances.

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 2016.06.03 2015노7598

-서울중앙지방법원 2016.07.15 2016노1259

-창원지방법원 2018.11.14 2018노1115

-서울고등법원 2018.06.07 2018노890

-수원지방법원 2017.09.28 2017노1549