beta
Text
The judgment below
In addition to the rejection of the request for compensation order, the part against the Defendants shall be reversed.
Defendant
B.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The victim of the misunderstanding of facts is merely disputing the defendant A, and the defendants did not have any fact at the time of the victim.
B. The punishment of the lower court (Defendant B: imprisonment for eight months, two years of probation, two years of probation, observation of protection, community service order 120 hours, Defendant C: imprisonment for six months of probation, two years of probation, surveillance of protection, and community service order 80 hours) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, the victim's statement on the fact that the defendants jointly committed an assault against the defendants A and the defendants, the circumstance that the defendants appeared in the scene of the crime, the order appearing in the crime scene, the method and part of the defendants used to assault the victim, the situation after the crime was completed, the defendants and the defendant's clothes, and the state of their employment, etc., as well as the specific facts that are consistent with the important contents from the early stage of the investigation to the court of the court of the court below, except for the difference of geographical expression, in light of the victim's statement and the victim's investigative agency and the court of the court of the court below, the victim's statement was credibility and there is no other circumstance that the victim's statements were made in the victim's statement in light of the victim's contents, attitude and method, etc.
H stated in the investigative agency and the court below that the Defendants did not have committed the crime at the time of the crime. However, even if based on the content of the statement by himself, H appears to have failed to directly witness the crime since it had existed after the crime of this case was committed. At the time of the crime, the victim was deemed not to drink, but was under the influence of alcohol.
In light of the contents of the statement, etc., the Defendants are deemed to have difficulty in trust and good faith.