beta
Text
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Although misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles (the fact of special injury) used by the defendant for the crime of this case constitutes "hazardous goods" in the crime of special injury, the court below found the defendant guilty only for the crime of injury on the ground that it does not constitute dangerous goods, and judged this part of the facts charged as not guilty on the ground of the judgment below which erred by misapprehending the facts
B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (six months of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, two years of probation, community service, 80 hours of imprisonment) is too uneasy and unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. On June 9, 2017, around 22:00 on June 22, 2017, the summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant stated in Geumcheon-gu Seoul Building C that, while drinking together with the victim D (the age of 46) and drinking together with the victim D (the age of 46), he/she was faced with the victim's illness, and that he/she continued to have been faced with the victim, and that he/she was faced with the victim with the surgery, which is a dangerous thing, and that the victim's treatment days cannot be known. 2) The court below held that the court below made a statement at the investigative agency of the victim as evidence consistent with the above facts charged, but there was a statement at the victim's investigative agency as to whether the victim was drunk and her statement was written with the victim's illness at the time of drinking, and immediately after the case, he/she stated that he/she was in accordance with the alcohol condition, and that there was no reference to the victim's disease in light of the fact that there was no mention.
In addition, in a specific case whether a certain thing constitutes “hazardous thing” as defined in a special assault crime and a special injury crime, the determination shall be made depending on whether the other party or a third party could feel any danger to life or body when using the thing in question in light of social norms.