beta
Text
The judgment below
The part against the defendant shall be reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.
except that this judgment.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. In the absence of any injury to the victims, there was no fact that the victims did not have injured the victims, and even if based on the statement of the victims, the Defendant did not seem to have a picker.
Nevertheless, the court below found the victim's statement that is doubtfully doubtful, guilty of the remaining charges of this case. The court below erred in the misapprehension of facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.
B. The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (no. 10 months of imprisonment, No. 1) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. 1) In light of the difference between the first instance court and the appellate court’s method of evaluating credibility according to the spirit of substantial direct trial adopted by the Korean Criminal Procedure Act as an element of the trial-oriented principle, the judgment of the court of first instance as to the credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance is clearly erroneous or, in light of the contents of the first instance judgment and the evidence duly examined by the first instance court, there are extenuating circumstances to deem that the first instance court’s determination on the credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance is clearly erroneous or that the first instance court’s maintenance of the first instance court’s determination on the credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance is clearly unfair, in full view of the results of the first instance examination and the evidence duly examined by the time the argument of the appellate court is concluded until the closing of arguments in the appellate court, the appellate court should not reverse the first instance judgment just because the first instance judgment on the credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance court differs from the appellate court’s judgment (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2011Do5313).