beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The Defendant, at the time of the instant case, was aware of the fact that he was pushed down with the victim, and flabed with flab. However, the Defendant’s flab was entered in the victim’s flab immediately adjacent to the time, and the Defendant’s flab was highly likely to be the victim’s flab, and the Defendant’s flab could not be deemed to have occurred during the Defendant’
In addition, if one criminal defendant had an intention to inflict an injury on the victim, he/she should have inflicted an assault on the victim due to drinking or saliva, and there was no intention to inflict an injury on the victim.
In order for the victim to listen only to the female-friendly speech, and to take a bath to the defendant in his own manner without inquiring about him, and as such, the defendant was pushing the victim in order to escape from an imminent threat to his body, this constitutes a legitimate defense.
Nevertheless, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.
B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (an amount of two million won) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination:
A. As to the assertion of mistake of facts, the lower court also argued that the Defendant alleged the aforementioned facts as alleged in the above facts, and rejected the above assertion by stating the judgment in detail. In addition, the lower court’s reasoning, which stated in the police that “the Defendant: (a) carried the victim’s breath and flaps; (b) carried the victim’s flaps; and (c) the police officer stated that “the police officer carried the victim’s photograph at the box, but was flaged with the victim’s blaps; and (d) the police officer carried the victim’s photograph at the box, which was the same as a blag that was fladd with in the process of carrying the victim’s photograph.” (Evidence No. 22, 24 pages) was duly adopted and investigated by the evidence duly adopted by the lower court.