The office of public prosecution accused a defendant of attempted robbery and threatening a victim with fake firearm. The office requested the court to penalise the defendant according to the relevant laws.

The court ruled that the defendant should be imprisoned.

The defendant and the office appealed the ruling before the court of appeal. The court upheld the appealed ruling.

The defendant appealed the ruling before the court of cassation. He said in his grounds of appeal that the ruling had erred in the application of law and had insufficient evidence of causation. He said that the court had established the ruling based on a medical report of the victim though it could not be considered as evidence.