beta
Text
Defendant
A All appeals filed by the Defendants and prosecutor are dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendant A1) The misunderstanding of facts and the misunderstanding of legal principles do not constitute dangerous objects.
Defendant
A is wearing safety shoes, such as usuals, and there was no perception that safety is used to inflict bodily injury on the victim.
2) The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (two years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
B. The sentence of each of the court below against the Defendants (unfair sentencing against the Defendants) (2 years of imprisonment with prison labor for Defendant A, and fine of one million won for Defendant B) is too uneased and unreasonable.
2. Determination:
A. misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles 1) The lower court determined that the safety shoes worn by Defendant A constitutes dangerous articles, and the Defendant A sustained an injury to the victim by carrying a dangerous article, which is a dangerous article.
The decision was determined.
The reasons are as follows.
① Safety in Defendant A’s report is used to protect workmen’ occurrence at the construction site. There is a strong and strong stoke, and strong stokes are inserted on the floor, and a strong stokes are inserted, and a steel plate which is larger than existing safety is inserted, thereby entirely saving workmen’s development.
Safety shoes are solid, and in the event of violence against people due to safety shoes, there is a risk of harming people's life and body.
(2) Defendant A shall take a walk with the face and clothes of a victim on several occasions while ensuring safety.
The victims suffered fatal injuries, such as damage of 16 weeks of treatment, factory heat, multi-lateral tymosis, multi-lateral tymosis, and luple of lups at lups.
③ Defendant A followed the victim by walking a safety signal while taking the safety signal. Defendant A followed the victim’s name.
Defendant
A is recognized as possessing a dangerous object of safety.
2) According to the judgment of the court below and the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court, the safety of Defendant A’s wearing.