logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2013.07.11 2013노790
폭력행위등처벌에관한법률위반(집단ㆍ흉기등상해)등
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal by the defendant;

A. misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles (victim E part) the victim E expressed a will to the defendant, salving the defendant's salke, and hiding the defendant's salke, and the defendant salkes the defendant's salke. The defendant's act constitutes self-defense inasmuch as the defendant's act was committed against the victim due to an empty salke, which is urgent to defend the victim's body

B. The sentence of the judgment of the court below on unreasonable sentencing (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination on the grounds for appeal

A. According to the evidence duly examined and adopted by the court below on the assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles (victim E part), it is recognized that the victim E expressed a desire to the defendant at the D main point of this case, and that the defendant was suffering from breath of the head of the victim, but the defendant was aware that the situation at the time was unable to cover the defendant's breath during the participation from the victim, and it is not recognized that the surrounding person was in a situation where the victim could not speak the victim.

In other words, the Defendant took the victim’s head from an empty disease by setting up against the flabbbbing the victim, and the Defendant’s above act has the nature of an attack beyond the victim’s defense against the attack. Therefore, it cannot be viewed as self-defense.

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

B. The Defendant alleged that his act of inflicting bodily injury on the victim E constitutes self-defense and did not seriously reflect his mistake, the victims did not compensate for medical expenses, etc. at all, and the Defendant had been punished by an act of violence at least 20 times. In particular, the injury to the victim E was committed during the period of suspension of execution due to the same kind of crime, and other crimes of this case.

arrow