beta
Text
The judgment below
The guilty part against Defendant B is reversed.
Defendant
B A person shall be punished by imprisonment for nine months.
. Prosecutors;
Reasons
1. The court below's scope of trial in this case dismissed the prosecution against the intimidation of Defendant B among the facts charged in this case, and found all the remaining facts charged guilty. Since only the guilty part among the facts charged in this case was appealed by Defendant B and the prosecutor and dismissed the prosecution without appeal by the Defendants and the prosecutor, the court's scope of trial in this case is limited to the part
2. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendant B (1) At the time of the instant crime, the Defendant was in a state of having lost or weak ability to discern things due to depression or shock disorder at the time of the instant crime.
(2) The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
B. The prosecutor (unfair punishment) sentenced by the court below to the defendants (the defendant A: 2 years of imprisonment, 3 years of probation, probation, 200 hours of community service order, 1 year and 6 months of imprisonment) is too unfluent and unfair.
3. Determination
A. According to the records as to the Defendant B’s assertion of mental disorder (1) as to the Defendant’s mental disorder (the Defendant), the fact that the Defendant was receiving a mental therapy due to the depression and shock disorder at the time of the instant case is recognized.
However, in light of the circumstances leading up to the instant crime, the Defendant’s behavior and attitude before and after the instant crime, etc., the Defendant was deprived of his ability to discern things or make decisions due to the depression or shock disorder at the time of the instant crime.
It does not seem that there was or was a weak state.
Therefore, the defendant's mental disorder is without merit.
(2) On the assertion of unreasonable sentencing (the defendant and the prosecutor) the crime of this case was committed by assaulting the victim by beer and beer who is a dangerous object, and the degree of injury to the victim is not less than that of the victim, and even though the defendant was under trial for the same kind of crime, he did not know even though he was under trial.