logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2017.07.14 2016노2455
폭행
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact, the Defendant did not assault C’s face face with the criminal intent of assault, but only attempted to prevent C from harming the Defendant’s insulting speech.

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts charged and thereby making a mistake of finding guilty of the facts charged.

B. In light of the legal principles, even if the Defendant’s act of preventing C from suffering as his/her hand is recognized as a assault as a use of force, it is an act for preventing C’s insulting speech, which constitutes a legitimate defense or an act for getting out of C’s unfair insult, and thus, constitutes a justifiable act.

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the legitimate defense or the lawful act, thereby convicting the facts charged.

2. Determination

A. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly adopted to determine the assertion of mistake of facts and the evidence examined, the Defendant and the victim C completed a civil lawsuit and carried out a horse fighting one another while leaving the court, and during that process, the Defendant’s hand-oned the victim’s left margin.

Even if the defendant committed the act of preventing the victim from suffering by his/her hand as alleged by the defendant, it can be evaluated as assault since it is the same in that it is an exercise of force against the victim's will.

Defendant’s assertion of mistake is rejected.

B. In full view of all the circumstances, including the motive and circumstance leading up to the instant assault, the form and consequence of the instant crime, the degree of the assault act, and the relationship between the Defendant and the victim, the Defendant’s act cannot be deemed as constituting a legitimate defense or a justifiable act.

We cannot accept the Defendant’s assertion of misapprehension of the legal doctrine.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is filed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.

arrow