(영문) 부산고등법원 2016.03.24 2015노708 | 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) 부산고등법원 2016.03.24 2015노708

특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(보복상해등)등

Text

Defendant

All appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1’s misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of legal principles as to Defendant 1’s misunderstanding of facts, and the Defendant found a singing room operated by the victim to find out the Defendant’s fry, horse, etc. from July 8, 2015 to the 15th of the same month, but there was no fact of intimidation for the purpose of retaliation as described in the facts charged, and even on July 16, 2015, the Defendant found the victim to sing in a singing room to agree with the victim, and even though there was no intimidation for the purpose of retaliation as described in the facts charged, the lower court convicted the Defendant of each of the facts charged. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal doctrine, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2) Mental and physical disorder was committed by the Defendant at the time of committing the instant retaliation for the purpose of retaliation, and the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the grounds that the Defendant would be exempted or mitigated from punishment.

3) The sentence (one year of imprisonment) imposed by the lower court on the Defendant is too unreasonable.

B. The sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below is too uneasible and unfair.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, including the part concerning the Defendant’s misunderstanding of the facts or misapprehension of the legal doctrine (the part concerning the crime of intimidation for retaliation), the Defendant’s testimony at the court of the lower court and the victim D’s investigative agency, the facts constituting the crime No. 1 of the lower judgment

A. (b) Since the fact of intimidation is sufficiently recognized for the purpose of retaliation as described in paragraph (b), the above assertion by the defendant is without merit.

B. In full view of the following: (a) the Defendant’s mental disorder assertion part; and (b) the process, means and method of retaliationing the Defendant’s injury crime; (c) the Defendant’s act before and after the commission of the crime; and (d) the statement made by the Defendant and the victim to the investigative agency.

유사 판례

-서울고등법원 2016.11.24 2016노2878

-부산고등법원 (창원) 2015.09.09 2015노217

-대구고등법원 2017.03.27 2017노51

-부산고등법원 2021.04.14 2021노81

-광주고등법원 2015.10.08 2015노265