beta
Text
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
The defendant is innocent. The summary of this judgment shall be notified publicly.
Reasons
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal asserts that “The Defendant unilaterally met with D and did not pluck up or pluck up D’s left hand hand. Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which recognized the Defendant’s liability for the crime of assault, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.”
2. Determination
A. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is that the Defendant is a lessee of C Housing (three-story) at macroscis and D is the owner of the instant housing.
Around 17:50 on February 21, 2013, the Defendant: (a) maintained the foregoing house by plucking up the visits of the Defendant’s pet dog, etc.; (b) on the ground that D, who visited the said house, made a pluck up for the Defendant that D, who visited the said house, scucked against the visit while scucking against the Defendant.
B. The lower court found the Defendant guilty on the basis of the evidence indicated in its judgment.
C. 1) In a criminal trial, the recognition of the facts constituting an offense ought to be based on strict evidence with probative value, which makes a judge not to have any reasonable doubt. Thus, in a case where the prosecutor’s proof fails to sufficiently reach the extent to have the aforementioned convictions, even if there is doubt of guilt, such as the defendant’s assertion or defense contradictory or unfluence, it should be determined in the interests of the defendant (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Do1487, Apr. 28, 201). 2) In light of the above legal doctrine, in light of the foregoing, the health stand in the instant case, and the defendant was unilaterally made from D in a consistent manner from D to the court immediately after the instant case and immediately after the trial, and the defendant did not have any plle or plle of D’s left hand hand over, while D asserted that it was consistent to the police investigation and court of the lower court to the effect that “the defendant has s left hand over.”
However, the records of this case can be revealed as follows.