beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Fact-misunderstanding and legal principles do not constitute an attack against the victim as stated in the judgment of the court below, and the degree of the injured party's wife is extremely minor and thus cannot be deemed as an injury.
Meanwhile, the Defendant’s statement of the fact-finding No. 2 as indicated in the judgment of the court below that the Defendant would have taken time from the injured party at the time and place as indicated in the crime No. 2 as indicated in the judgment of the court below, and that the victim’s fingers are less friendly, but it is only an act that does not violate social rules.
Nevertheless, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts charged or by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.
B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (the penalty amounting to KRW 500,00) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. As to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts and legal principles, the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court, namely, ① consistently stated to the effect that the victim suffered injury by attacking the Defendant, and the lower court’s judgment on the credibility of the victim’s statement was clearly erroneous.
It does not seem that there are special circumstances to view the crime as stated in paragraph (1) of the crime in the original judgment. ② The victim’s photograph (Evidence No. 9 page of the evidence record) taken immediately after the crime as stated in paragraph (1) of the crime in the original judgment is found to be flicked or divided into the victim’s arms, and ③ The victim listens to the police officer dispatched at the time of committing the crime as stated in paragraph (1) of the crime in the original judgment that “I am for only one time to go to the city community neighboring the city community,” and he did not find the hospital in the idea that the above crime would not be criminalized. ④ The victim’s statement is consistent with the part and degree of the victim’s injury that the victim suffered, and the victim was receiving a pain treatment. In full view of the above, the defendant attacked the victim as stated in the judgment of the lower court.