logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 2015.01.08 2014노1871
재물손괴
Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The defendant argues that, although the defendant did not intentionally damage a car owned by the victim, it was damaged by negligence in the course of cleaning the rooftop, the judgment of the court below that the defendant intentionally damaged a car owned by the victim, which affected the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding the fact.

B. The Defendant asserts that the sentence imposed by the lower court (a fine of 200,000 won) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts

A. On October 13, 2013, the Defendant: (a) destroyed the instant car in order to ensure that the back glass bars of the E Carrens car owned by D, which was parked on the road front of the said Ba, was broken and the repair cost of approximately KRW 1,354,210 of the market price was broken, on the ground that the Defendant cleaned the 5th floor of the above Bara in Kimhae-si on the ground of cleaning the 10:15 on October 13, 2013.

B. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged.

C. 1) The recognition of facts constituting an offense in the relevant legal doctrine ought to be based on strict evidence with probative value, which makes a judge not to have any reasonable doubt. Thus, in a case where the prosecutor’s proof does not sufficiently reach the degree to have the aforementioned conviction, even if there is a doubt of guilt, such as the defendant’s assertion or defense contradictory or uncomfortable dismissal, it should be determined in the interests of the defendant (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Do14487, Apr. 28, 201). In addition, as a subjective element of the constituent elements of the crime, it refers to a case where the possibility of the occurrence of an offense that causes an incomplete intention is expressed as unclear, and it is recognizable as to the possibility of the occurrence of the crime in order to have an incomplete intention, as well as the awareness of the possibility of the occurrence of the crime.

arrow