logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2016.04.22 2016노731
폭력행위등처벌에관한법률위반(집단ㆍ흉기등상해)
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact, the Defendant cited knife a knife to the knife hand at the time of the instant case and tried to knife the body of the victim with the knife to the knife the knife of the victim's left hand, and the victim knife the knife part on the knife, and the Defendant did not intentionally commit the back part of the victim.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which convicted the Defendant of the facts charged of this case is erroneous and adversely affected by the judgment.

B. The sentence sentenced by the court below to the defendant (one year of imprisonment, one year of confiscation) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court regarding the assertion of mistake of facts, the lower court may fully recognize the fact that the Defendant inflicted injury on the victim on the back of the road, which is a dangerous object as stated in the lower court’s decision, on one occasion.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of facts is without merit.

① The Defendant admitted all of the instant crimes in the court of the lower court, and no special circumstance exists to suspect the credibility of the Defendant’s confession.

② According to the statements made at an investigative agency of the victim, the victim’s children, and his/her mother, the Defendant appears to have exercised violence against the victim several times.

③ The victim’s statement by the police (not more than 28 pages of the evidence record) submitted a written agreement (100 pages of the evidence record) to the Defendant to an investigative agency, and reversed the previous statement to the effect that the situation at the time was not well memory in the investigative agency and the court of the court below. However, in light of the following: (a) the fact that the case was a statement only within the two-way frame in which the case occurred; (b) the fact that the contents of the statement recorded in the protocol were directly experienced are relatively accurately and in detail, the contents of the above police statement are more reliable.

arrow