beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendant did not inflict any injury on the victim, as stated in the facts charged, and the injury that the victim sustained is merely a sking of a victim who is not superior to this case. Even if the victim suffered any injury by the Defendant’s act, the Defendant’s act constitutes self-defense as a defensive act against the victim’s assault, which is a defensive act.
Nevertheless, the lower court found the Defendant guilty on the facts charged of this case. In so determining, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine and mistake of mistake.
2. The lower court found the Defendant guilty on the facts charged of the instant case on the ground that the victim stated from the investigative agency to the lower court that he was satisfing the chest body twice from the Defendant to the lower court, and that he was satisfing the satisf, etc., on the following grounds: (a) the victim’s statement is consistent and consistent; (b) the victim’s photograph and the description of the victim’s injury diagnosis report on the victim’s part of the damage;
The following circumstances acknowledged by the record are that the victim stated in the court below that he did not want punishment against the defendant in the court below, but he was abused from the defendant, such as the statement in the facts charged. In light of the fact that it is difficult to see that the victim made a false statement in order to mislead the defendant differently, the victim's statement can be sufficiently believed.
Furthermore, the medical records received by the victim claiming for the pain of the left-hand chest are limited to the records received at S Hospital on May 18, 2015, the day after the occurrence of the case, and according to the records of the victim's national health insurance benefits submitted in the trial, there is no medical records on the victim's chest pain before the medical records were found. Thus, it is difficult to view that the injury as stated in the facts charged is the spathn of the victim.
In addition, the medical records of S Hospital are examined.