beta
Text
The judgment below
The part against the defendant shall be reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.
except that this judgment.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles recognize the fact that the defendant inflicted an injury on the victim A (joint defendant), but the victim's chest was not flicker disease, and there was no intention to flicker and pulse the victim's chest, and there was no intention to do so.
B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. Comprehensively taking account of the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court and the lower court’s judgment regarding the assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, the Defendant may recognize the fact that the Defendant inflicted an injury on the victim by breaking the lusence of the lusium.
Therefore, we cannot accept this part of the defendant's assertion of mistake and misapprehension of legal principles.
1) The Defendant prepared a written statement on September 18, 2017, which was three days after the date of the instant crime. The written confirmation of the investigation process (in the investigation record 8 pages) attached to the said written statement states that “I had induced the victim to do so in a planned manner. When the victim was in the process of meeting the lower level, I removed her chest and face, and did so.” On October 25, 2017, the Defendant stated in the police that “the Defendant did not have the ability to make the Defendant under the influence of alcohol when she was under the influence of alcohol,” and that “I stated that I did not receive the Defendant and the victim from each other,” and stated to the effect that “I am the victim’s statement to the effect that I will not reverse the investigation record (the investigative record 29,30 pages),” and that “I am the victim’s statement to the effect that I see the Defendant’s statement to the same effect as “I am under the influence of 91” (the investigative record).