beta
Text
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. The court below dismissed the prosecution on the grounds that the victim had withdrawn his wish to punish the defendant among the facts charged in the instant case. The court below acquitted the defendant on the grounds that there is no proof of crime as to the violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a group, deadly weapons, etc.). Since the prosecutor only appealed the part not guilty and the part of dismissing public prosecution for which the prosecutor did not appeal, the court below's judgment is limited to the part of innocence among the judgment below.
2. As to the part of the judgment of the court below on the summary of the grounds of appeal, it is reasonable to view that the defendant injured the victim E (hereinafter “E”) with an industrial knife, but the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant of this part of the facts charged is erroneous in matters of law.
3. Determination
A. On November 29, 2012, at least 1:30 on November 29, 2012, the Defendant, the summary of this part of the facts charged, on the ground that the victim E (the 40-year-old age, nationality Sri Lanka), a park of the same nationality, who works together with the D plant located in Macheon-si, did not rapidly take a degree of course to stop left hand, took a look at the victim’s fishing and take a bath at the victim, and thereafter, took an industrial knife (the knif length: 10cm, the total length: 25cm) of the victim’s knifbbbbbbbbbbs, which are a thing dangerous to the left hand, was cut one time, and the victim’s right side side side of the victim’s industrial knife, followed by the victim, and left the factory entrance.
B. The lower court determined that, according to the description of the medical statement and the images of the victim’s photograph, the fact that E received hospital treatment by suffering heat from the right side and the leaving side on the date indicated in the above facts charged is recognized, and further, the above injury was caused by the Defendant’s act.