2014No1301 Occupational, etc.

A person shall be appointed.

Defendant

Freeboard (Public Prosecution), Lee In-bok, Kim Il-il (Public Trial)

Attorney Lee In-bok

Daejeon District Court Decision 2013Gohap348 Decided May 2, 2014

April 2, 2015

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 4,00,00.

Defendant who has converted 100,000 won into one day when the above fine has not been paid;

shall be confined in a workhouse.

In order to order the provisional payment of an amount equivalent to the above fine.

1. Summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts);

In light of the fact that until June 9, 2010, the Defendant could not have anticipated that the victim had contributed to the military in addition to the leakage of the military room, since the Defendant was negligent in performing his/her duties as a doctor, the Defendant cannot be deemed to have committed an occupational negligence on the part of his/her will, inasmuch as he/she was unable to expect that the victim had contributed to the military in addition to the leakage of the military room until June 9, 2010, in light of the fact that the Defendant had committed an occupational negligence.

2. Determination

According to the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court below, the following facts are recognized:

1) The victim showed 1 June 1, 2010, 2010, 200. 6. 1, 2010 after the first diversary diversary diversary diversary diversary diversary diversary diversary diversary diversary diversary evesary diversary evesary diversary evesary evesary evesary evesary evesary evesary evesary evesary eves from the 6th evesary diversary evesary divesary evesary divesary evesary divesary evesary evesary evesary evesary evesary eves. 16c c.

In light of the above facts, (i) it is important to determine whether there was a fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoralsium fluor fluoral fluor fluor fluor fluor fluor fluor fluor fluor fluor fluor fluor fluor fluor fluor fluor fluor fluor fluor fluor flud f.

On a different premise, the prior Defendant’s assertion is rejected.

3. Ex officio determination of sentencing

In full view of the circumstances that may be considered in the background of the occurrence of the instant case; the Defendant appears to have provided medical treatment by making his best after finding a complaint, the bereaved family members and the bereaved family members do not want the punishment of the Defendant; the Defendant has no criminal history; and other various sentencing conditions, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime; and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentence of the lower court against the Defendant is too unreasonable.

4. Conclusion

The judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds of ex officio reversal, and it is again decided as follows.

Criminal facts and summary of evidence

The summary of facts constituting an offense and evidence recognized by this court are as stated in each corresponding column of the judgment below. It shall be quoted in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Article of the Criminal Act and the selection of punishment for the crime;

§ 268 of the Criminal Code. Selection of fine

1. Invitation of a workhouse;

Articles 70 and 69(2) of the Criminal Act

1. Order of provisional payment;

Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

The presiding judge shall be a judge of the Yellow Cross.

Judges Orala

Judges Jeon Soo-soo