(영문) 대구지방법원 2014.01.10 2013노2205 | 리걸엔진

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 대구지방법원 2014.01.10 2013노2205

상해

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The sentence of sentence against the defendant shall be suspended.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Since the Defendant’s misunderstanding of facts only supported the victim’s growth or the part part of the fuckbucks, it cannot be deemed that the Defendant’s injury to the part of the bucks suffered by the victim was caused by the Defendant’s assault.

B. In light of the legal principles, the Defendant committed an assault against the victim to defend the victim by first considering the victim’s head, and thus, constitutes self-defense.

C. The sentence imposed by the court below on the grounds of unreasonable sentencing (the fine of KRW 500,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In the investigation agency and the court of original instance, the victim of the judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts was submitted as evidence in the investigative agency and the court of original instance that “the defendant made a statement that he had the right side of the buckbbbbbbbs, so the defendant made a hole one time on the left side, and the body part containing the injury diagnosis statement and the body part containing the symptoms of the right side leaving the right side are taken into evidence. However, according to the CCTV image, according to the CCTV image, the defendant only knee part below the victim's knebbbbbbbs, but it does not appear that the victim's statement on the parts above the victim's knebbbbbbbs is difficult to believe, and it is insufficient to recognize that the victim's statement on the part of the injury was caused by the Defendant's assault, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this otherwise.

Therefore, this part of the defendant's argument is justified.

B. In a case where it is reasonable to view that the perpetrator’s act of judgment as to the assertion of misapprehension of the legal principles is not for the purpose of defending the victim’s unfair attack, but for the intent of attacking one another, and thus, the perpetrator was forced to attack and set up against it, the harmful act has the nature of the act of attack at the same time as the act of attack. Therefore, it cannot

(See Supreme Court Decision 2000Do228, Mar. 28, 2000). In light of the above legal principles, the images of health units and CCTV are examined.

참조판례

-대법원 2000. 3. 28. 선고 2000도228 판결

유사 판례

-대구지방법원 2013.11.29 2013노1162

-서울고등법원 2013.11.22 2013노3087

-대구지방법원 서부지원 2014.04.04 2014고단104

-대구지방법원 2016.12.09 2016고합430

-창원지방법원 2016.12.22 2016노1986