beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
Summary of Grounds for Appeal
The Defendant alleged a misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of legal principles is likely to cause a serious stop in cases where he/she is shocked on his/her chest by attaching an artificial heart gambling motive, and only requested the victim to leave the gas gun to defend himself/herself, and to leave the gas gun to defend himself/herself, and the victim’s head does not seem to have any more. The Defendant’s above act constitutes self-defense, but the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal doctrine that found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.
The sentence of imprisonment (six months of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, and confiscation) imposed by the court below on the defendant on the ground of unfair sentencing is unreasonable.
Judgment
In full view of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the victim E was on the taxi operated by the defendant around 19:25 on September 12, 2012, and the victim thought that the defendant was driving on the taxi with his/her destination and brought an objection to the defendant. The victim's arrival at the destination, and the victim was driving on the taxi with his/her phone number plate of the defendant's operation at the destination, and it is recognized that the victim was able to look at the victim from the gas gun carried while the defendant reported it at the destination.
In order for a certain act to be recognized as self-defense, the act must be aimed at defending the present unfair infringement of one’s own or another’s legal interest. In light of the facts acknowledged as above, the defendant’s above act does not aim at defending the present unfair infringement of one’s own or another’s legal interest, and thus, it cannot be deemed as legitimate self-defense. Thus, the defendant’s mistake
The defendant has been punished by a fine or heavier, in consideration of the argument of unfair sentencing.