특수절도등
The judgment below
The part concerning the accused case shall be reversed.
Defendant
A Imprisonment with prison labor for a maximum of one year and one year, and the defendant.
1. Of the facts charged in this case, the court below found the Defendants not guilty on the grounds that there is a conspiracy between the Defendants regarding the special larceny, but there is no joint relation at the site, and found the Defendants guilty on the charge of larceny only. ② On the grounds that it is evident that U.S. expressed his wish not to punish the Defendant for violation of the Road Traffic Act against U.S., the court dismissed the public prosecution on the grounds that it is evident that U.S. expressed his wish not to punish the Defendant, and found the Defendant guilty on the charge of the violation of the Road Traffic Act against the victim L
However, in the case of this case, only the defendants appealed on the ground that the sentencing of the guilty part is excessive, and the prior prosecutor did not appeal the part of the acquittal part and the part of the dismissal of prosecution. However, according to the principle of no appeal, the part of the acquittal part and the part of the dismissal of prosecution are also remanded to the trial court. However, the part already deviates from the object of attack and defense between the parties, and thus, the conclusion of the judgment of the court below is to be followed, and it is not stated separately in the reasoning of the judgment.
2. Summary of and judgment on the grounds for appeal
A. The gist of the grounds for appeal is that the lower court’s punishment (one year and a short-term of one year and six months for each term of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
B. Considering the fact that the number of crimes committed by Defendant A by Defendant A regarding the grounds for appeal by Defendant A is large, and part of the damage therefrom has not been recovered, and that the above Defendant committed an interview and interview with the faceing of an abandoned house and having taken care of and harming it again in a planned manner without being aware of the fact that the above Defendant already received juvenile protective disposition several times, it is necessary to sentence the above Defendant with severe punishment because both the nature and character of the crime and the risk of recidivism is bad and the risk of recidivism is very high.
However, the foregoing.