beta
Main Issues
Whether the act of citing Maz's disease constitutes a case where a dangerous act is carried with a dangerous thing.
Summary of Judgment
Maz's disease refers to an empirical rule that the other party or the general third party may feel the danger of causing harm to the life or body of a person if he/she sets it out with the aim of causing harm to the life or body of a person. Thus, the act of Maz's and Maz's act constitutes a case where he/she carries "hazardous goods" as stipulated in Article 3 (1) of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act.
[Reference Provisions]
Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 3(1) of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act
Escopics
Defendant
upper and high-ranking persons
Defendant
Defense Counsel
Attorney Han-jin
Judgment of the lower court
Busan District Court Decision 83No2316 delivered on February 24, 1984
Text
The appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
The grounds of appeal by the defendant and his defense counsel are examined.
Examining the evidence cited by the court of first instance by comparing the records maintained by the court of first instance, it is sufficient to acknowledge a criminal facts against the defendant in the judgment of the court of first instance, and it is not recognized that there is no violation of the rules of evidence or misconception of facts by failing to exhaust the deliberation as alleged in the process of recognizing the facts.
In addition, Article 3 (1) of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act provides that "a deadly weapon or other dangerous object" shall include a gun, knife, and other things which have the characteristics of killing a person, as well as those which can cause danger and injury to a person's life if they are used by social norms. Thus, Maz's theory refers to an empirical rule that if they are loaded with a part of snife or a snife a person, it may cause harm to the person's life and body, and the other party or a third party may cause harm to the person's life and body. Therefore, the court below did not err in the measures that the court below acknowledged that the defendant's act constitutes a case of carrying a so-called dangerous object, citing this case's Maz disease, and there is no illegality of finding that the defendant's act
Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.
Justices Kang Jong-young (Presiding Justice)