beta
(영문) 대전지방법원 2012.02.02 2011노2683

특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(절도)

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant, at the time of committing the instant crime, was in the state of mental disorder or mental disability due to excessive behavioral disorder (ADD).

(b) Original sentence of unfair sentencing (two years of imprisonment);

2. Determination

A. According to the record of the judgment on the assertion of mental disorder, the Defendant’s mental illness was seriously enough to discern things or make decisions due to the seriousness of the Defendant’s mental disorder from October 11, 2010 to November 5, 2010. However, in light of the background leading up to the Defendant’s crime, the means and method of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the Defendant did not have the ability to discern things or make decisions.

Since it seems that the defendant was in a state or weak condition, the above argument by the defendant is without merit.

B. The Defendant’s crime of this case against the assertion of unfair sentencing is habitually stolen goods worth KRW 3,067,00,00 in total, five times each residence of the victims, and the quality of the crime is bad. The Defendant has been punished two times due to the same kind of crime, such as juvenile protective disposition, one fine, and one suspended sentence of imprisonment. Among them, on December 30, 209, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of ten years for larceny, etc. from the Hongsung Branch Branch of the Daejeon District Court on December 30, 2009. On January 7, 2010, when the above judgment became final and conclusive, he again committed the same kind of crime in this case, even if he had been under the suspended sentence. However, in light of the fact that the Defendant led the Defendant to the instant crime in the first instance court and violated his wrong nature, the Defendant appears to have reached an agreement between the victim and the Defendant on the victim’s mental disorder and the victim’s mental disorder.