logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 울산지방법원 2016.04.29 2016노171
특수협박
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact, the Defendant misunderstanding the facts as stated in the facts charged of the instant case, and there is no fact of threatening the victim.

B. The punishment of the lower court (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In light of the difference between the first instance court and the appellate court’s method of evaluating the credibility of the testimony of the first instance court in light of the contents of the first instance judgment and the evidence duly examined in the first instance court, the first instance court’s determination on the credibility of the testimony of the first instance court was clearly erroneous, in light of the contents of the first instance judgment and the evidence duly examined in the first instance court.

Unless there are extenuating circumstances to see the credibility of the statement made by a witness of the first instance trial and the result of further examination of evidence conducted by the court of first instance until the closing of pleadings, the appellate court should not reverse without permission the first instance judgment on the sole ground that the first instance judgment on the credibility of the statement made by a witness of the first instance is different from the appellate court’s judgment (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2011Do5313, Jun. 14, 2012). Examining the evidence of the court below, in light of the above legal principles, such as the witness E’s legal statement and the statement made by the investigative agency, the lower court did not appear to have any special circumstance to see that the judgment by the court of first instance on the credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance is remarkably unfair, and the defendant’s assertion that the victim was threatened at the time and place of the lower court’s judgment is acceptable.

B. As to the wrongful assertion of sentencing, the Defendant denies the instant crime until the party is in trial, and does not seek a letter to the victim or endeavor to recover the damage.

arrow