2013No579 Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a group or deadly weapon)

Bodily Injury)

A person shall be appointed.

Both parties

Kim Jong- or (Lawsuits) and Park Jae-in (Trial)

Law Firm B

Attorney in charge C

Ulsan District Court Decision 2013Gohap190 Decided October 18, 2013

February 12, 2014

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for eight years.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant

The sentence of the lower court (four years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

(b) Prosecutors;

The sentence of the court below is too unhued so that it is unfair.

2. Determination

The fact that the defendant recognized the crime of this case against the wrongness of the defendant, that the defendant has no record of criminal punishment, and that the defendant has a father/child to support the crime of this case is favorable to the defendant.

However, the crime of this case is committed only on the ground that the victim returned home immediately due to the following reasons: (a) the victim saw the neck of the victim, saw the neck, which is a deadly weapon; (b) while preparing an agreement with the police investigation to agree on divorce in the event of assaulting the victim in the future; and (c) the crime of this case shows that there is no reason to consider the motive or circumstance of the crime; (d) there is no reason to consider the motive or circumstance of the crime; and (e) the method of the crime is very harsh (as a result of the autopsy, two government, face face, etc. of the victim; (e) both arms and sponsing and sponsing; and (e) when both arms and sponsing and sponsing are found, both arms and sponsing; and (e) when both arms and sponsing and sponsing are found, both arms and sponsing the victim.

In light of the facts, it is inevitable to punish the Defendant with severe punishment. Furthermore, even before the instant crime, the Defendant continued to not satisfing verbal abuse and assault against the victim. The instant crime appears on the line. In short, since 2011, the Defendant began to exercise violence and continued to exercise violence by using the victim’s satching, brying, etc., and even after having been consulted at the Women’s Center, Ulsan Seacare Center on January 16, 2012, the Defendant was unable to have been aware of the victim’s batching and satisfying the victim’s face at the time of committing the instant crime, and was admitted to protective facilities after having been consulted with the victim on the point that it was difficult for the victim to recover the victim’s batch at the time of 19 years and August 2012, the Defendant appears to have been aware of the victim’s batching and satisfying the victim’s mental distress immediately after having been committed by assaulting the victim.

In full view of the grounds for determining sentencing favorable or unfavorable to the defendant and other various conditions of sentencing, such as the defendant's age, character and conduct, family environment, background of the crime, and circumstances before and after the crime, the sentence of the court below is considered to be unfair rather than unreasonable because it is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's argument of unfair sentencing is without merit, and the prosecutor's argument of unfair sentencing is with merit.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the appeal by the defendant is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act because it is without merit, and the prosecutor's appeal is with merit. Thus, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act

Criminal facts and summary of evidence

The summary of the facts charged by this court and the evidence thereof are as follows: 1. The summary of the evidence of the court below is as follows: 1. The statement of the court below is the same as the statement of each corresponding column of the court below in addition to adding "a confirmation of domestic violence victims and a confirmation of counseling on damage" to "a confirmation of domestic violence victims."

Application of Statutes

1. Article applicable to criminal facts;

Articles 3(1) and 2(1)3 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, Article 257(1) of the Criminal Act (the occupation of an injury to carry dangerous articles) and Article 259(1) of the Criminal Act (the occupation of an injury or death)

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

Article 37 (former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 (Concurrent Crimes Concerning Death or Injury with Aggravation Other Crimes)

The reasons for sentencing are as follows: (a) the sentence shall be determined as ordered in consideration of the circumstances as considered in the paragraph 2.

The presiding judge shall be transferred to a judge.

Judges Jeong-young

Judges already appointed

1) However, a disposition that does not have the right to prosecute the above crime by declaring that the victim does not want the punishment of the defendant on the 23th of the same month.

was received.