beta
Text
The judgment below
The remainder, excluding the dismissed part, shall be reversed.
A fine of KRW 700,00 is imposed on a defendant.
Reasons
1. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that the victim's house glass has already been damaged, and the defendant has no fact of damage; and
2. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the court below on March 13, 2015, prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant's ex officio, the defendant was found to have been sentenced to imprisonment for one year and six months by force at the Incheon District Court on March 13, 2015, and the judgment became final and conclusive on May 28, 2015. Since the crime in the judgment of the court below is in the concurrent relationship between the crime of indecent act by force and the crime in the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, the punishment shall be determined after examining whether to reduce or exempt punishment by taking into account the case where the judgment is to be rendered simultaneously and equity pursuant to Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act. Since the application of the statutes of the court below was omitted
However, the judgment of the court below has such reasons for ex officio reversal.
Even if the defendant's assertion of mistake is still subject to the judgment of this court, it is examined.
3. The following circumstances, which can be recognized by the court below based on the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court below, namely, ① the victim did not open the entrance from the investigative agency to the court of the court below, and the defendant stated that the defendant damaged the victim’s house and corridor glass. (Although the defendant’s statement is not consistent with the method of destroying the victim’s house, it seems that the victim did not have correctly observed it, and thus, it does not dismiss the credibility of the victim’s statement) and ② the defendant also tried to open the victim’s house glass, and thereby, recognized the fact that the victim’s house glass was collapsed, as stated in the facts charged.