logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2017.12.20 2016노2612
교통사고처리특례법위반등
Text

All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

Reasons

1. The appellant against the Defendant’s appeal shall submit a written reason for appeal to the appellate court within 20 days from the date he/she receives the notice of the records of trial (Article 361-3(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act). If the reason for appeal is not submitted within the said period, the appellate court shall dismiss the appeal by decision (Article 361-4(1) of the same Act). According to the records of this case, even if the Defendant received a notice of receipt of the records of trial from this court on August 8, 2016, he/she did not submit a written reason for appeal within the period for submitting the documents of reason for appeal, and the petition of appeal does not contain any indication of reason for ex officio examination on the records and cannot find any reason otherwise.

2. Judgment on the prosecutor's appeal

A. The summary of the grounds for appeal is as follows: (1) misunderstanding the facts and misapprehension of the legal principles (the dismissed part of the judgment of the court below) based on the evidence submitted by the prosecutor; (1) G witnessing the Defendant’s victim F (hereinafter “victim”) and satisfing the Defendant’s vision; and (2) even if the Defendant did not use other violence against the victim after breathing the victim’s breath, it was sufficiently intended to assault the victim by using G’s act at the time.

In full view of the fact that it appears, the Defendant and G assaulted the victim jointly.

It is reasonable to view it.

Nevertheless, the lower court determined that Defendant cannot be punished as a crime of violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint assault). In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on joint principal offenders, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

(2) The sentence of the lower court that is unfair in sentencing (4 million won in penalty) is too unhued and unfair.

B. (1) Determination as to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles (A) The summary of this part of the facts charged is located in Gwangju Northern-gu around September 11, 2015.

arrow