beta
Text
The judgment below
The part against the defendant shall be reversed.
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 80,000.
The defendant above.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The Defendant’s act constitutes a legitimate defense by an act that has considerable grounds for defending an unfair infringement on his/her body, property, etc. even if the Defendant’s act constitutes the element of the crime of assault (misunderstanding of facts). The Defendant’s act constitutes a legitimate defense by means of an act that has considerable grounds for defending an unfair infringement on his/her body, property, etc., even though it constitutes the element of the crime of assault.
The sentence (one million won in penalty) declared by the court below is so excessive that it is unfair (unfair in sentencing). 2.
A. 1) The evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court on the part of the assault against A and C, and in particular, according to the CCTV video CDs, the Defendant, even after the physical fighting with the victim A, C, and D was completed, satisfying (CCTV display time 19:24:40), and the victim’s hand (CCTV display time 19:25:53). The Defendant was found to be guilty of the facts charged as to the Defendant, on the ground that it is true (CCTV display time 19:26:27 to 19:27:00).
shall not be deemed to exist.
The above assertion by the defendant is without merit.
2) The summary of the charge of assault against D is as follows: “The Defendant committed assault against D in such a way as to take the face of D in his/her hand after taking the face from the location as stated in the facts constituting the crime as indicated in the judgment below,” and the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the above charge by using the suspect interrogation protocol, CCTV video recording, etc. on D.
Accordingly, the police statement of D was made by the defendant in the process of cutting back the bags that the defendant flicked, while the CCTV video recording was made by the defendant, the defendant was money in the case of the CCTV video.