(영문) 창원지방법원 2016.07.13 2015노2144 | 리걸엔진

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 창원지방법원 2016.07.13 2015노2144

폭력행위등처벌에관한법률위반(공동상해)등

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles 1) In relation to the crime No. 1 of the judgment of the court below, the victim K did not have any injury due to the defendant's act on the day of the case. Rather, as the crime No. 2 of the judgment of the court below, the victim K was injured in the process of making a correction with B, as the crime No. 2 of the judgment of the court below.

Even if the completeness of body was damaged, this was damaged.

Although this part of the facts charged cannot be seen, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B) In full view of the circumstances before and after the Defendant committed assault against the victim K, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged, which erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine, and thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment, on the ground that, even if the Defendant committed assault against the victim K, the Defendant did not have known that he would interfere with the performance of duties by a public official, even

2) In relation to the crime of Article 2 of the judgment below, the defendant did not contact his own son B with around March 20, 2015, and the defendant and B did not commit the act at the site of this case. Thus, although the defendant and B acted separately at the site of this case, they did not commit the crime of Article 2 of the judgment below, they committed the crime of Article 2 of the judgment in collusion with the defendant and B.

As such, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court (ten months of imprisonment and two years of suspended sentence) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) In light of the following circumstances, it is reasonable for the lower court to have found the Defendant guilty of this part of the charges in light of the following facts and circumstances admitted by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court.

유사 판례

-의정부지방법원 2017.09.27 2017노2199

-대전지방법원 2016.03.17 2015노3810

-춘천지방법원 강릉지원 2016.01.21 2015노409

-서울남부지방법원 2018.01.19 2017노1156

-서울동부지방법원 2016.06.30 2016노169