beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (the factual error) is that the defendant only expressed a desire to the combat police D, and did not do any assault by drinking, and the court below found the defendant guilty by erroneous recognition of the facts and sentenced the defendant. The judgment of the court below is erroneous in misunderstanding of facts.
2. Determination
A. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court, the facts constituting the crime as indicated in the lower judgment can be fully recognized.
1) Of the facts pertaining to the instant crime, the Defendant appears to have been unable to memory the part of his assaulted by the riot police. That is, the Defendant, immediately before the instant crime was committed, stated that he dysium was dysium and dysium (the Defendant, upon being investigated by the police, dysium dysium dysium and dysium dysium dysium dysium dysium dysium dysium dysium dysium dysium dysium in
(A) As a result, the Defendant had been able to take a significant place at the time of the instant crime (i.e., the witness D’s testimony). According to the witness D’s testimony, the Defendant, under the influence of alcohol, was snicking, and was snicking.
(2) On May 16, 2012, the Defendant was arrested as a flagrant offender immediately after the instant crime, and was investigated as a suspect around 05:55 on May 16, 2012 when four hours had passed since the instant crime committed, and stated that “The Defendant, upon receiving a report from the Defendant, was using the police gear, such as G, etc., who was sent to the police officer on the part of the police officer on the part of the patrol, was using the police gear, for instance, including those who were sent to the police officer on the part of the patrol, after having been investigated as a suspect status around 05:55 on May 16, 2012.” The Defendant requested a formal trial against a summary order on October 4, 2012, and then the Defendant claimed a formal trial on the summary order on November 16, 2012.