beta
Text
Defendant
In addition, the appeal by the candidate for medical treatment and custody is dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Although there is a fact that the defendant and the requester for medical treatment and custody (hereinafter referred to as the "defendant") have excessively possessed the excess at the time and place stated in the facts charged, there is no fact that the victim inflicted an injury by excessively exposing the excess amount.
B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (two years and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of mistake of facts, in light of the part 1 of the defendant's case, at around 01:10 on August 11, 2012, the defendant 1 seems to have had the ability to distinguish things or make decisions with the mental divided document at the time of the crime of this case, and the victim's desire to be punished without any specific reason. The defendant 2 was able to recognize the fact that he saw the victim's chest part, left part, face part, and face part several times in the defendant's chest part, left part, left part, and caused an interview with the victim. The defendant's argument of mistake of facts is without merit. The defendant's assertion of unreasonable sentencing seems to have been in a state where the defendant had the ability to distinguish things or make decisions with the mental divided document at the time of the crime of this case, and that the victim did not have any punishment against the defendant in favor of the defendant.
However, the crime of this case was committed by the victim, who is walking on a road without any relationship with the defendant, with a deadly weapon. It cannot be deemed that the quality of the crime is somewhat weak in light of the relationship with the defendant and the victim, and the method of the crime. The defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for a two-year term as a result of the crime of the same kind as the crime of this case, and again committed the crime of this case during the period of repeated crime for which one year and five months have not passed since the termination of its execution, and the defendant was punished twice as a sentence of violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act from around 1987.