logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2013.07.12 2013노1799
폭행등
Text

The judgment of the first instance shall be reversed.

The defendant shall be exempted from punishment.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is unreasonable. 2. The fact that the defendant's mistake was divided in depth, the damage was not significant due to each of the crimes of this case. The defendant was sentenced to six months of imprisonment on February 7, 2012, and this case was finalized on October 27, 2012 (the defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor of this case) and ten months of imprisonment on February 14, 2013, and was sentenced to habitual fraud, insult, injury, assault, etc. (the defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor of this case 2012No5297, 5522 (combined) and was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor of this case, and the defendant did not appear to have been sentenced separately from the types of crimes of this case, and the circumstances leading to each of the crimes of this case are somewhat similar to those of each of the crimes of this case, and thus, the sentencing of each of the crimes of this case becomes unfair.

3. According to the conclusion, the appeal by the defendant is accepted, and the judgment of the first instance is reversed pursuant to Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the judgment is to be rendered again after pleading.

The summary of the facts constituting a crime and the evidence admitted by this court is identical to the judgment of the court of first instance, and the summary of the evidence is cited as it is in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act, except that the part of the second criminal facts of the judgment of the court of first instance was determined, and, on February 14, 2013, the Suwon District Court rendered a sentence of ten months of imprisonment with labor due to habitual fraud, insult, bodily injury, assault, etc. at the Suwon District Court, which became final and conclusive on February 22, 2013.

Application of Statutes

1. Article 260 of the Criminal Act is applicable to the relevant criminal facts and the choice of punishment (the choice of a fine);

arrow