특수강도등
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.
The seized one piece (Evidence No. 1) shall be confiscated.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles (the point of special robbery) have money that the Defendant would have to receive from the injured party.
I think that there was a threat for the establishment of a special robbery, or there was a coercion, because the victim gave money without causing a big threat to the victim, although the victim had attempted to go against the victim.
shall not be deemed to exist.
B. At the time of each of the instant crimes, the Defendant was in the state of inhaleing industrial key materials, and thus, had no awareness and judgment ability or significantly weak.
(c)
The punishment sentenced by the court below to the defendant (three years of imprisonment, etc.) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. Determination on misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles 1) In a case where a person has the right to receive an intentional robbery or a property related to social reasonableness but received a property by using assault and intimidation to the extent generally acceptable in light of social norms, it is a legitimate exercise of rights.
Therefore, the intent of robbery and its illegality are recognized (see Supreme Court Decision 95Do2385 delivered on December 12, 1995, etc.). Even if the defendant is entitled to receive the lottery prize from the injured party, he/she has the right to receive the lottery prize from the injured party.
I think that it was
Even in light of the above legal principles, there is no difficulty in recognizing the defendant's intentional robbery, etc.
2) Since the crime of robbery is a crime of forcibly taking property or acquiring other property benefits by means of assault and intimidation to the extent that it is impossible to resist by suppressing the victim’s intent, the crime of robbery is not based on abstract average or general public, in light of social norms (see Supreme Court Decision 2004Do4437, Oct. 28, 2004).