logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2020.09.15 2019노2545
폭력행위등처벌에관한법률위반(공동폭행)
Text

All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles were to prevent the victim's assault and unauthorized entry, and the Defendants' act cannot be seen as an exercise of physical force against the victim B's body.

Nevertheless, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles of legitimate act or self-defense and by misapprehending the facts.

B. The sentence sentenced by the court below on unreasonable sentencing (Defendant A: fine of 700,000 won, Defendant B: fine of 500,000 won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The Defendants asserted that mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles are identical to the grounds for appeal, and the court below rejected the Defendants’ assertion after explaining them in 2-3 of the judgment of the court below. If the court below duly adopted and examined the evidence in light of the records of this case, the judgment of the court below is justified.

However, even if such purport is included, the court below rejected the Defendants’ above assertion on the second-third side of the judgment. If the court below duly adopted and examined the evidence, it is just in the judgment of the court below.

Therefore, the defendants' assertion of mistake and misapprehension of legal principles is without merit.

B. If there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court’s judgment on the assertion of unfair sentencing, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it in the appellate

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). In general, the lower court determined the punishment by taking into account various circumstances as stated in its reasoning.

In addition to the circumstances indicated by the lower court, no new circumstance exists to change the sentence of the lower court, and the Defendants’ age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means, and crime.

arrow