(영문) 울산지방법원 2020.08.21 2020노559 | 리걸엔진

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 울산지방법원 2020.08.21 2020노559

상해등

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Of the instant facts charged, the lower court rendered a judgment of not guilty on the charge of interfering with each business from November 9, 2017 to the 26th day of the same month (the first crime in the market), interference with business from March 4, 2019, the injury on April 23, 2019, the violence, the injury on October 13, 2019, the injury on October 13, 2019 (the second or fifth crime in the foregoing judgment), and the injury on November 22, 2017.

Since only the Defendant appealed on the guilty portion of the judgment of the court below, the entire acquittal portion of the judgment of the court below was separated and finalized in excess of the appeal period.

Therefore, the scope of this court's judgment is limited to the conviction part of the judgment below.

2. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The judgment of the court below which recognized the crime of injury to L even though the defendant did not assault L, is erroneous in the misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles.

B. The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (the first crime: imprisonment with prison labor for four months, and the second or five crimes in its ruling: imprisonment with prison labor for six months) is too unreasonable.

3. Determination

A. Determination of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of the legal doctrine regarding the assertion of mistake of facts: (a) where the statements made by the witnesses, including the victim, are mutually consistent and consistent with the facts charged, it shall not be rejected without permission, unless there exists any separate evidence that is objectively deemed to lack credibility; and (b) the mere fact that the statements made by the witness, including the victim, are somewhat inconsistent with the statements concerning other minor matters in the major part, does not necessarily mean that the credibility of the statements made by the witness is not readily denied (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Do2631, Jun. 28, 2012). In light of the substance of the first instance judgment and the evidence examined by the first instance court, there are special circumstances to deem that the first instance judgment on the credibility of the statements made by the witness of the first instance was clearly erroneous, or that the results

유사 판례

-춘천지방법원 2015.03.18 2014노1119

-춘천지방법원 2013.05.29 2012노944

-인천지방법원 2020.05.29 2019노2845

-수원지방법원 2021.03.24 2020노2712

-춘천지방법원 2015.03.18 2015노42