<> "The repository administrator has not yet configured an RDF license."^^ . <> . . "ANALISIS PUTUSAN HAKIM TERHADAP PELAKU TINDAK PIDANA\r\nPENGANIAYAAN \r\n(Studi Putusan Nomor 105/Pid.B/2022/PN Met)\r\n "^^ . "Penganiayaan imerupakan iperbuatan iyang imenyebabkan irasa isakit, iluka, iatau \r\nipenderitaan ibaik ijasmani imaupun irohani ipada iorang ilain. iberdasarkan iputusan \r\niNomor i105/Pid.B/2022/PN iMet. iPemidanaan i terhadap iterdakwa iterlampau \r\niringan, iserta ihak ikorban ipenganiayaan ibelum isemestinya idijadikan isebagai \r\nisalah isatu ipertimbangan. iBerdasarkan ihal itersebut, irumusan imasalah idalam \r\nipenelitian iini ibagaimanakah idasar ipertimbangan ihakim idalam imenjatuhkan \r\niputusan iterhadap ipelaku itindak ipidana ipenganiayaan i(studi iputusan inomor iNomor \r\ni105/Pid.B/2022/PN iMet) idan iapakah iputusan iNomor iNomor i105/Pid.B/2022/PN \r\niMet itelah imemenuhi itujuan ipemidanaan.\r\nPenelitian iini imenggunakan imetode ipendekatan iyang ibersifat iyuridis inormatif idan \r\nididukung iyuridis iempiris imenggunakan ipendekatan iperaturan iperundang-undangan \r\niyang iberlaku iserta istudi ikepustakaan idan ididukung iwawancara idengan inarasumber \r\nipada ipenelitian iini iterdiri idari iHakim ipada iPengadilan iNegeri iMetro, iJaksa ipada \r\niKejaksaan iNegeri iMetro, idan iDosen iBagian iHukum iPidana iFakultas iHukum \r\niUniversitas iLampung. iPenelitian iini imenggunakan ianalisis idata isecara ideskriptif \r\nikulitatif.\r\nHasil iPenelitian idan ipembahasan imenunjukkan ibahwa idasar ipertimbangan imajelis \r\nihakim idalam imenjatuhkan iputusan iNomor i105/Pid.B/2022/PN.Met idianalisis idari \r\nitiga iaspek iutama, iyaitu iyuridis, ifilosofis, idan isosiologis. iDari iaspek iyuridis, imajelis \r\nihakim itelah imempertimbangkan isecara icermat idakwaan iyang idiajukan ioleh \r\niPenuntut iUmum idengan isistem isubsideritas, iyakni idakwaan iprimair iPasal i351 iayat \r\ni(2) iKUHP itentang ipenganiayaan iyang imengakibatkan iluka iberat idan idakwaan \r\nisubsidair iPasal i351 iayat i(1) iKUHP itentang ipenganiayaan ibiasa. iBerdasarkan ifakta \r\nipersidangan, imajelis ihakim imenilai ibahwa itusukan isenjata itajam iyang idilakukan \r\niterdakwa itidak imengakibatkan iluka iberat isebagaimana idimaksud idalam iPasal i90 \r\niKUHP, isehingga iunsur idakwaan iprimair itidak iterpenuhi. iOleh ikarena iitu, iterdakwa \r\nihanya iterbukti isecara isah idan imeyakinkan imelakukan itindak ipidana ipenganiayaan \r\nisebagaimana idiatur idalam iPasal i351 iayat i(1) iKUHP, idengan iancaman ipidana \r\nipenjara ipaling ilama i2 itahun i8 ibulan. iaspek ifilosofis, iputusan ipemidanaan iselama i1 \r\nitahun ipenjara iterhadap iterdakwa idinilai ibelum imencerminkan ikeadilan isubstantif \r\nibagi ikorban imaupun imasyarakat. iVonis itersebut ibelum imempertimbangkan isecara \r\nutuh idampak ipsikologis idan ifisik iyang idialami ikorban iakibat iperbuatan iterdakwa. iPada iaspek isosiologis, iputusan iini itetap imemberikan manfaat isebagai ibentuk \r\nipenegakan ihukum idan iupaya ipencegahan ikejahatan idi imasyarakat. iHukuman \r\nipenjara iyang idijatuhkan ikepada iterdakwa idapat imemberikan iefek ijera, ibaik ikepada \r\nipelaku imaupun imasyarakat iluas, iagar itidak imelakukan iperbuatan iserupa. iTujuan \r\nipemidanaan idalam i105/Pid.B/2022/PN.Met idalam iKUHP iNasional itelah iterpenuhi \r\nidalam iaspek ipembalasan, ipencegakan, idan irestoratif. iNamun idalam iaspek \r\nirehabilitasi ibelum iterwujud idikarenakan ipemulihan ikerugian ipada ikorban idengan \r\nipemidanaan idalam iputusan ibelum iberkeadilan idengan ikorban.\r\n\r\nAdapun isaran idalam ipenelitian iini, ikepada imajelis ihakim idalam imenjatuhkan\r\niputusan iterutama iberkaitan idengan itindak ipidana ipenganiayaan idiharapkan\r\nimemperhatikan ipertimbangan isecara iyuridis, ifilosofis, idan isosiologis iterutama\r\nipada iaspek ifilosofis iyang imewujudkan irasa ikeadilan ikepada imasyrakat idengan\r\nimengutamakan ihak-hak ikorban idalam ipemulihan ikerugianya. iPenulis iberharap\r\nikepada ipenegak ihukum imenerapakan itujuan ipemidanaan idalam iKUHP iNasional\r\nisebagai ibentuk ipenyelesaian ikonflik idengan ipemulihan ihak ikorban itindak ipidana \r\nipenganiayaan \r\n \r\nKata ikunci i: iPenganiayaan, iPutusan iHakim, i itujuan ipemidanaan\r\nAssault iis ian iact ithat icauses ipain, iinjury, ior isuffering, iboth iphysically iand imentally, \r\nito ianother iperson. iBased ion iDecision iNumber i105/Pid.B/2022/PN iMet, ithe \r\nipunishment iimposed ion ithe idefendant iwas irelatively ilight, iand ithe irights iof ithe \r\nivictim iof iassault iwere inot iadequately iconsidered ias ione iof ithe imain ifactors iin ithe \r\nijudgment. iBased ion ithis, ithe iresearch iproblems iformulated iare: iwhat iare ithe ibasic \r\niconsiderations iof ithe ijudge iin irendering ia iverdict iagainst ithe iperpetrator iof ithe icrime \r\niof iassault i(case istudy iof iDecision iNumber i105/Pid.B/2022/PN iMet), iand iwhether \r\nithe idecision ihas ifulfilled ithe iobjectives iof icriminal ipunishment.\r\nThis iresearch iuses ia inormative ijuridical iapproach, isupported iby ian iempirical \r\nijuridical iapproach, iutilizing istatutory iand iliterature istudies, ias iwell ias iinterviews \r\niwith iresource ipersons iconsisting iof iJudges iat ithe iMetro iDistrict iCourt, iProsecutors \r\niat ithe iMetro iDistrict iAttorney's iOffice, iand iLecturers iin iCriminal iLaw iat ithe iFaculty \r\niof iLaw, iUniversity iof iLampung. iThe idata ianalysis iis iconducted idescriptively iand \r\niqualitatively.\r\nThe iresults iand idiscussion ishow ithat ithe ijudge's iconsiderations iin iDecision iNumber \r\ni105/Pid.B/2022/PN.Met iare ianalyzed ifrom ithree imain iaspects: ijuridical, \r\niphilosophical, iand isociological. iFrom ithe ijuridical iaspect, ithe ipanel iof ijudges \r\nicarefully iconsidered ithe icharges isubmitted iby ithe iPublic iProsecutor iusing ia \r\nisubsidiarity isystem, inamely ithe iprimary icharge iof iArticle i351 iparagraph i(2) iof ithe \r\niCriminal iCode iregarding iassault iresulting iin iserious iinjury, iand ithe isubsidiary \r\nicharge iof iArticle i351 iparagraph i(1) iof ithe iCriminal iCode iregarding iordinary iassault. \r\niBased ion ithe ifacts iof ithe itrial, ithe ijudges ifound ithat ithe istabbing iwith ia isharp \r\niweapon icommitted iby ithe idefendant idid inot iresult iin iserious iinjury ias idefined iin \r\niArticle i90 iof ithe iCriminal iCode, iso ithe ielements iof ithe iprimary icharge iwere inot \r\nifulfilled. iTherefore, ithe idefendant iwas ionly iproven ilegally iand iconvincingly ito ihave \r\nicommitted ithe icrime iof iassault ias iregulated iin iArticle i351 iparagraph i(1) iof ithe \r\niCriminal iCode, iwhich icarries ia imaximum iprison isentence iof i2 iyears iand i8 imonths. \r\niPhilosophically, ithe ione-year iimprisonment isentence iimposed ion ithe idefendant iis \r\niconsidered inot ito ireflect isubstantive ijustice ifor ithe ivictim ior isociety. iThe iverdict idid \r\ninot ifully iconsider ithe ipsychological iand iphysical iimpact isuffered iby ithe ivictim ias ia From ithe isociological iaspect, ithis idecision istill iprovides ibenefits ias ia iform iof ilaw\r\nienforcement iand icrime iprevention iin isociety. iThe iprison isentence iimposed ion ithe\r\nidefendant ican ihave ia ideterrent ieffect, iboth ifor ithe iperpetrator iand ithe iwider\r\nicommunity, ito iprevent isimilar iacts. iThe iobjectives iof ipunishment iin iDecision\r\niNumber i105/Pid.B/2022/PN.Met iunder ithe iNational iCriminal iCode ihave ibeen\r\nifulfilled iin iterms iof iretribution, ideterrence, iand irestorative iaspects. iHowever, ithe\r\niaspect iof irehabilitation ihas inot ibeen irealized ibecause ithe irecovery iof ilosses ifor ithe\r\nivictim ithrough ithe ipunishment iin ithe idecision iis inot iyet iequitable ifor ithe ivictim. \r\nThe isuggestion iin ithis iresearch iis ithat ijudges, iin irendering idecisions, iespecially \r\nirelated ito icriminal iacts, iare iexpected ito iconsider ijuridical, iphilosophical, iand \r\nisociological iaspects, iparticularly ithe iphilosophical iaspect ithat irealizes ia isense iof \r\nijustice ifor isociety iby iprioritizing ithe irights iof ivictims iin ithe irecovery iof itheir ilosses. \r\niThe iauthor ihopes ithat ilaw ienforcement iofficers iwill iimplement ithe iobjectives iof \r\nipunishment iin ithe iNational iCriminal iCode ias ia iform iof iconflict iresolution iby \r\nirestoring ithe irights iof ivictims iof icriminal iacts iof iassault.\r\nKeywords: iAssault, iJudge’s iDecision, iPurpose iof iPunishment \r\n\r\n\r\n"^^ . "2025-05-20" . . . . . "FAKULTAS HUKUM"^^ . . . . . . . "PRASETYO "^^ . "SULISTIAWAN "^^ . "PRASETYO SULISTIAWAN "^^ . . . . . . "ANALISIS PUTUSAN HAKIM TERHADAP PELAKU TINDAK PIDANA\r\nPENGANIAYAAN \r\n(Studi Putusan Nomor 105/Pid.B/2022/PN Met)\r\n (File PDF)"^^ . . . "ABSTRAK.pdf"^^ . . . "ANALISIS PUTUSAN HAKIM TERHADAP PELAKU TINDAK PIDANA\r\nPENGANIAYAAN \r\n(Studi Putusan Nomor 105/Pid.B/2022/PN Met)\r\n (File PDF)"^^ . . . "ANALISIS PUTUSAN HAKIM TERHADAP PELAKU TINDAK PIDANA\r\nPENGANIAYAAN \r\n(Studi Putusan Nomor 105/Pid.B/2022/PN Met)\r\n (File PDF)"^^ . . . "SKRIPSI FULL TANPA PEMBAHASAN.pdf"^^ . . . "ANALISIS PUTUSAN HAKIM TERHADAP PELAKU TINDAK PIDANA\r\nPENGANIAYAAN \r\n(Studi Putusan Nomor 105/Pid.B/2022/PN Met)\r\n (Other)"^^ . . . . . . "indexcodes.txt"^^ . . . "ANALISIS PUTUSAN HAKIM TERHADAP PELAKU TINDAK PIDANA\r\nPENGANIAYAAN \r\n(Studi Putusan Nomor 105/Pid.B/2022/PN Met)\r\n (Other)"^^ . . . . . . "ANALISIS PUTUSAN HAKIM TERHADAP PELAKU TINDAK PIDANA\r\nPENGANIAYAAN \r\n(Studi Putusan Nomor 105/Pid.B/2022/PN Met)\r\n (Other)"^^ . . . . . . "indexcodes.txt"^^ . . . "ANALISIS PUTUSAN HAKIM TERHADAP PELAKU TINDAK PIDANA\r\nPENGANIAYAAN \r\n(Studi Putusan Nomor 105/Pid.B/2022/PN Met)\r\n (Other)"^^ . . . . . . "lightbox.jpg"^^ . . . "ANALISIS PUTUSAN HAKIM TERHADAP PELAKU TINDAK PIDANA\r\nPENGANIAYAAN \r\n(Studi Putusan Nomor 105/Pid.B/2022/PN Met)\r\n (Other)"^^ . . . . . . "preview.jpg"^^ . . . "ANALISIS PUTUSAN HAKIM TERHADAP PELAKU TINDAK PIDANA\r\nPENGANIAYAAN \r\n(Studi Putusan Nomor 105/Pid.B/2022/PN Met)\r\n (Other)"^^ . . . . . . "medium.jpg"^^ . . . "ANALISIS PUTUSAN HAKIM TERHADAP PELAKU TINDAK PIDANA\r\nPENGANIAYAAN \r\n(Studi Putusan Nomor 105/Pid.B/2022/PN Met)\r\n (Other)"^^ . . . . . . "small.jpg"^^ . . . "ANALISIS PUTUSAN HAKIM TERHADAP PELAKU TINDAK PIDANA\r\nPENGANIAYAAN \r\n(Studi Putusan Nomor 105/Pid.B/2022/PN Met)\r\n (Other)"^^ . . . . . . "ANALISIS PUTUSAN HAKIM TERHADAP PELAKU TINDAK PIDANA\r\nPENGANIAYAAN \r\n(Studi Putusan Nomor 105/Pid.B/2022/PN Met)\r\n (Other)"^^ . . . . . . "ANALISIS PUTUSAN HAKIM TERHADAP PELAKU TINDAK PIDANA\r\nPENGANIAYAAN \r\n(Studi Putusan Nomor 105/Pid.B/2022/PN Met)\r\n (Other)"^^ . . . . . . "ANALISIS PUTUSAN HAKIM TERHADAP PELAKU TINDAK PIDANA\r\nPENGANIAYAAN \r\n(Studi Putusan Nomor 105/Pid.B/2022/PN Met)\r\n (Other)"^^ . . . . . . "ANALISIS PUTUSAN HAKIM TERHADAP PELAKU TINDAK PIDANA\r\nPENGANIAYAAN \r\n(Studi Putusan Nomor 105/Pid.B/2022/PN Met)\r\n (Other)"^^ . . . . . . "lightbox.jpg"^^ . . . "ANALISIS PUTUSAN HAKIM TERHADAP PELAKU TINDAK PIDANA\r\nPENGANIAYAAN \r\n(Studi Putusan Nomor 105/Pid.B/2022/PN Met)\r\n (Other)"^^ . . . . . . "preview.jpg"^^ . . . "ANALISIS PUTUSAN HAKIM TERHADAP PELAKU TINDAK PIDANA\r\nPENGANIAYAAN \r\n(Studi Putusan Nomor 105/Pid.B/2022/PN Met)\r\n (Other)"^^ . . . . . . "medium.jpg"^^ . . . "ANALISIS PUTUSAN HAKIM TERHADAP PELAKU TINDAK PIDANA\r\nPENGANIAYAAN \r\n(Studi Putusan Nomor 105/Pid.B/2022/PN Met)\r\n (Other)"^^ . . . . . . "small.jpg"^^ . . "HTML Summary of #88338 \n\nANALISIS PUTUSAN HAKIM TERHADAP PELAKU TINDAK PIDANA \nPENGANIAYAAN \n(Studi Putusan Nomor 105/Pid.B/2022/PN Met) \n \n\n" . "text/html" . . . "340 Ilmu hukum" . . . "345 Hukum pidana" . .