beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. In the case of mistake of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles 1) 2018 Godan1197, the defendant was aware of spitation and spitation by the victim's insulting speech and spitation by the victim once, and there was no fact when the victim spits the victim's chest, and the victim first did assault the defendant's finger, such as tear, and the defendant's clothes, so it was merely self-defense to restrain the defendant's spition, and the police officer did not take it over until the victim's head was dispatched. However, the court below found the defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged. 2) In the case of 2018 Godan24566, the court below erred in misunderstanding of legal principles, even though the defendant merely spiting the police officer, and thus, it cannot be deemed that the defendant committed the crime of obstruction of performance of official duties. This constitutes an unlawful act and thus, the defendant's act for resistance is found guilty of facts in this part of the facts charged.
B. The sentence of imprisonment (one year of imprisonment) imposed by the court below on the defendant is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court with respect to the determination of misunderstanding of facts: (a) the victim consistently made a statement that corresponds to the facts charged from the investigative agency to the court of the lower court; (b) the statement of each injury diagnosis against the victim and the image of the victim’s upper part of the photograph taken of the victim’s upper part of the victim’s body are consistent with the body and degree of the victim’s injury; and (c) there are no other circumstances to suspect the credibility of the statement.
In addition, in light of the following circumstances before and after this part of the crime and the degree of the victim's injury, the above act of the defendant constitutes self-defense.