logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 2019.01.10 2018노344
폭력행위등처벌에관한법률위반(공동상해)등
Text

All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles as to the Defendants’ joint injury to the victim F. The Defendants attempted to restrain the illegal possession of the victim F. The Defendants did not have damaged the victim F. As stated in the facts charged, and the Defendants’ act cannot be said to have suffered the injury. In addition, in light of the background and form of the instant crime, the Defendants’ act is justified as self-defense or legitimate act, and there was justifiable reason to believe that the Defendants did not constitute a crime. 2) Defendant Q’s act of assault against the victim E, A, and C was spread of the arms attached to the instant victims in the process of dispute with the said victims, and there was no assault or assault as stated in the facts charged, and there was no intention to commit the act.

3) The part of Defendant S’s injury to Defendant S’s victim J was elbow, when the chest of the above victim was blue, or when the bridge was not taken, there was no intention of injury, and the above victim was not injured due to Defendant S’s act. 4) The part of Defendant S’s damage to Defendant S’s property was damaged due to Defendant S’s act. However, the above part of Defendant S’s damage to Defendant S’s property did not constitute “other’s property” as referred to in the crime of property damage, since Defendant S purchased for heating instead of W.

B. In light of the background and motive of each of the instant crimes on unfair sentencing, the circumstances after the commission of the crimes, and the criminal record and relationship, etc., the lower court’s sentence against the Defendants (Defendant Q: a fine of KRW 1.5 million, Defendant S: a fine of KRW 2.5 million) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles with respect to each of the Defendants’ joint injury against the victim F, F, H, I, A, and C of the lower court’s witness F, H, I, and C, the Defendants and Co-defendant C of the lower court, and each of the legal statements and medical statements of P, etc.

arrow