logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 청주지방법원 2020.11.12 2020노448
폭행등
Text

All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of three million won.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The grounds of appeal by the first instance judgment of the court below 1) 1) misunderstanding of facts against the victim - did not have assaulted the victims E, but all of the facts charged of this case on the grounds of false statements by the victims - the judgment below which convicted the victims of the charges of this case - was erroneous in the misapprehension of facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding the facts. 2) In light of the fact that the occurrence of this case was attributable to the victims, and the degree of damage was not excessive, the court below's punishment (1.5 million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

B. The ground of appeal by the second judgment of the court below 1) misunderstanding facts and misapprehension of legal principles unilaterally committed an assault from the victims, even if there was a physical contact with the victims, it constitutes self-defense to oppose the harmful act by the victims, and even those who requested the police to handle the case, the court below's judgment convicting the victims of the charges of this case on the ground of the false statement of the victims, which affected the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding facts or misunderstanding the legal principles on self-defense. 2) In light of the fact that the defendant suffered damages from assault from the victims of this case and the degree of damage was not excessive, the court below's punishment is too unreasonable.

2. We examine ex officio the grounds for appeal prior to the judgment ex officio.

The first and second original judgments were sentenced to each of the defendants, and the defendant filed an appeal against them, and this court decided to hold a joint hearing of the above two cases of appeal. Since each of the crimes against the defendant in the first and second original judgments is concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, one of the crimes in the relation of concurrent crimes under Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act should be sentenced pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act, the first and second

(b).

arrow