(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.01.29 2014노3874

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) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.01.29 2014노3874

폭력행위등처벌에관한법률위반(집단ㆍ흉기등상해)등

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. (1) misunderstanding of facts; (2) the Defendant had to resolve the injury, such as a deadly weapon, even before the victim I, but did not request 2 million won to resolve the injury; (3) the victim’s head was merely replaced by the hand floor; and (4) the victim’s body was not able to take time due to drinking and launching, and the F did not threaten knife the knife, which is a deadly weapon, into the part of the victim.

(2) In order to prevent the Defendant from paying the alcohol value, there is no fact that the Defendant, as described in this part of the facts charged, frighted the victim L by creating an atmosphere for fear as stated in this part of the facts charged.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. (1) According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below concerning the assertion of mistake of facts, the defendant: (a) requested the victim I to pay money at the scene of the crime of this case; (b) the victim I refused the defendant's request; and (c) the defendant and E met the victim I's body with drinking and drinking together; and (c) the defendant and E met the victim I's body with drinking and drinking; and (d) the knife who was in possession of the victim I's hair and face with the victim I's head and face being faced with the victim I's knife due to the fact that the victim I was faced with the victim I's knife and knife on the table, and the knife who was in possession of the victim I's knife with the victim I's body and face; and (c) even thereafter, it can be sufficiently recognized that the defendant and D continued to use the knife with the victim I for approximately seven weeks medical treatment.

Therefore, this part of the defendant's assertion of mistake is without merit.

(2) According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, as the victim L, who demanded the alcohol value with F, etc. at the time stated in this part of the facts charged, the court below did not pay the alcohol value after creating an atmosphere for fear as stated in this part of the facts charged.

유사 판례

-인천지방법원 2012.11.09 2012고단9803

-서울서부지방법원 2014.05.28 2013고단2275

-인천지방법원 부천지원 2016.12.23 2016고단3010

-서울중앙지방법원 2014.09.19 2014고단4779

-서울북부지방법원 2015.05.07 2015노113