강도상해등
The judgment of the first instance shall be reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.
but for three years from the date this judgment becomes final.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. In light of the overall circumstances, in light of the mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, the time when the defendant inflicted an injury on the victim K by assaulting the victim K falls under the stage of not going away from the safety place after the completion of the larceny and there is a possibility of being arrested by the victim. Therefore, the crime of robbery was established against the defendant despite the fact that the time of assault against the above victim was after the completion of the larceny, and thus, the time of assault against the above victim was deemed to be after the completion of the larceny, and thus, the judgment of the first instance court which acquitted the defendant of this part of the facts charged is erroneous
B. The sentence sentenced by the first instance court of unfair sentencing (one year and six months of imprisonment, three years of suspended execution, three years of probation, confiscation) is too uneasible and unfair.
2. Determination:
A. (1) The summary of this part of the facts charged (as to the injury by robbery) is as follows: (a) the summary of this part of the facts charged (as to this part of the facts charged) is as follows: (b) the victim K, after the theft crime as indicated in the first instance judgment, she gets a bicycle and flaps, and flaps of the Defendant; and (c) assaulted the said victim for the purpose of evading arrest, thereby causing a necessary injury to the said victim for about four weeks.
(2) The relevant legal doctrine quasi-Robbery is established when a thief commits an assault or intimidation with a view to property recovery or resistance, etc. on an opportunity for larceny. As such, the assault or intimidation is required to commence the commission of larceny and take place in a stage that is likely to have not been completed by social norms as it is immediately after the commission of the larceny, or immediately after the commission of the larceny or immediately after the commission of the commission of the larceny.
(3) The first instance court’s judgment on September 11, 1984 is acknowledged based on the evidence duly adopted and investigated.