beta
(영문) 창원지방법원 진주지원 2015.11.26 2015고단219

분묘발굴유골유기

Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

Around September 2014, the Defendant: (a) mobilized four persons of the deceased E’s graves managed by D in South and North Sea C; (b) abandoned the deceased’s remains laid in the said grave; (c) failed to arbitrarily remove the remains to the village joint cemetery located in the same Ri; and (d) failed to notify D thereof.

Summary of Evidence

1. The defendant's partial statement 1, witness F, G, H, I, and J's respective legal statements;

1. Protocol of examination of the witness witness D;

1. Each police statement to D or K;

1. Each investigation report (on-site verification of the location of a grave, hearing of the grave's telephone statement in K), each on-site photograph, aerial photography, and removal;

1. The defendant and his defense counsel asserted that since the defendant excavated the grave of this case with permission from F, the husband of L or L buried in the grave of this case, the defendant's intention or illegality should be avoided. The crime of excavating the grave of this case should be viewed as the purport that even if a person who is not authorized or authorized to do so with respect to the grave of this case or a person who does not have the right to open the grave of this case without permission, it should be punished only where the grave of this case is excavated without permission against the deceased's religious order against the deceased's body. Thus, the illegality of the act of this case should be excluded in cases where the person who has the right to protect, serve, manage, and dispose of the grave of this case or the person who has obtained the legitimate consent from him is discovered with the religious order of the body of this case, in accordance with the above evidence (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Do8131, Dec. 13, 2007).

Although there was a request for a change with B, it did not obtain a legitimate consent from D or L, and F did not obtain a specific and clear consent.