Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. In fact, the Defendant: (a) reported that the victim F was a member of the operation of the victim E, and did not inflict any injury on the victim F, and there was no other fact that the victim E was damaged by the visit; and (b) there was no fact that the Defendant only destroyed the victim E by the visit.
Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found all of the charges of this case guilty is erroneous in misconception of facts.
B. The sentence imposed by the court below on the grounds of unreasonable sentencing (the fine of 2.5 million won) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. Recognizing the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of mistake of facts, ① victim F has consistently stated that the victim F suffered an injury by assault from the victim in investigative agencies and the court of the court below, according to the injury diagnosis submitted by the victim F, the victim E was in compliance with the victim F’s statement, ② the victim E did not directly witness the victim F in the court of the court below, but the victim E did not directly witness the victim F. However, the victim F did not directly witness the victim F, but the victim F stated that the victim F was the victim’s f was the victim’s f’s f’s f’s f’s f’s f’s f’s f’s f’s f’s f’s f’s f’s f’s f’s f’s f’s f’s f’s f’s f’s f’s f’s f’s f’s f’s h
B. Although the Defendant agreed with E, the victim of the crime of causing property damage, the lower court appears to have determined the sentence by fully considering such circumstances, and there is no change in circumstances that may be considered in the trial.