[특수절도미수][공1989.10.15.(858),1429]
The case holding that there is commencement of larceny
If an offender entered a church in excess of a fence and one of them gets a string to find a string, it cannot be said that there was no physical color for the stolen object.
Articles 25(1) and 342 of the Criminal Act
Defendant
Defendant
Attorney Han Han-hun
Seoul Criminal Court Decision 89No1824 delivered on May 25, 1989
The appeal is dismissed.
Number of detention days after an appeal shall be included in the calculation of the original sentence.
The grounds of appeal by the defense counsel are examined.
The court of first instance, cited by the court below, examined the evidence of the court below in comparison with the records, and recognized a special larceny in the judgment of the defendant, and there is no violation of the rules of evidence or misapprehension of the legal principles of larceny in the judgment of the court below, since the defendant and co-defendant 1 entered the marina of the injured company in excess of the fence and one of them cannot be said to have engaged in any coloring activity on the stolen object in this case.
Therefore, the appeal shall be dismissed, and part of the detention days after the appeal shall be included in the original sentence. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.
Justices Lee Jong-soo (Presiding Justice) Lee Chang-soo Kim Jong-won