beta
Text
All part of the judgment of the court below against Defendant A shall be reversed.
Defendant
A shall be punished by a fine of 800,000 won.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendant A, N (1) misunderstanding of facts against the judgment of the court below 1) Defendants 1 and Ha (1) did not jointly assault the victim O that caused disturbance by entering the church on the day of the instant case, because it is likely that the victim J and H et al. might be different from the victim O who caused disturbance in the course of entering the church.
(2) The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendants (a fine of KRW 300,000) is too unreasonable.
B. Defendant A, B (the judgment of the court below of the second instance), and Defendant A, a mistake of facts, made the dispute between Defendant B and the victim J, and did not spather the face of the J as stated in the facts charged, and Defendant B did not incur any injury to theJ in collaboration with Defendant A.
(2) The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendants (the Defendant A’s fine of KRW 500,00,000, Defendant B’s fine of KRW 700,00) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal ex officio, this Court tried at a concurrent hearing of two appeals cases against the two judgment of the court below. Each of the offenses against Defendant A, which the court below held, is a concurrent offense under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and shall be sentenced to one sentence pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. In this regard, the part against Defendant A among the judgment of the court below is no longer maintained.
However, despite the above reasons for ex officio reversal, the Defendants’ assertion of mistake of facts, Defendant N and B’s assertion of unreasonable sentencing is still subject to the judgment of this court, and we will examine below.
B. (1) In full view of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court regarding Defendant A and N’s assertion of mistake, Defendant A and N’s assertion can be recognized as having committed an assault to the victimO as stated in the facts charged, so the above assertion by Defendant A and N is with merit.