beta
(영문) 부산고등법원 2018.09.19 2018노372

특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(절도)등

Text

The remainder of the judgment of the court below, excluding the dismissal of an application for compensation order, and the second judgment.

Reasons

1. The first instance court dismissed the application for compensation by the applicant for compensation.

According to Article 32(4) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, an applicant for compensation is unable to file an appeal against the judgment dismissing the application for compensation. Therefore, the rejection part of the application for compensation was immediately finalized.

Therefore, among the judgment of the court of first instance, the rejection of the application for compensation is excluded from the scope of adjudication of this court.

2. The decision of the court below on the summary of the reasons for appeal (the first instance court: the imprisonment of four years, and the second instance court: the imprisonment of six months) is too unreasonable.

3. The defendant filed an appeal against the entire judgment of the court below, and this court decided to hold concurrent hearings of the appeal cases.

Since each crime of the judgment below is one of the concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, a sentence should be imposed in accordance with Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. As such, the remainder of the judgment of the court below excluding the rejection of an application for compensation order among the judgment of the court of first instance and the judgment of the court of

4. As the remaining parts of the judgment of the court below No. 1, which excludes the rejection of the application for compensation order, and the judgment of the court below No. 2, is reversed ex officio as above, without examining the defendant's unfair argument of sentencing, all of them are reversed pursuant to Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the judgment below is again

Criminal facts

The summary of the judgment of the court below is as stated in the summary of the evidence (Provided, That the "driving license" of the damaged article 17 No. 1 of the List of Crimes attached to the judgment of the court below is a clerical error in the "resident registration certificate", and thus corrected). The application

1. Article 5-4(6) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes related to the crime, Article 329 of the Criminal Act (a comprehensive charge of larceny), Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act (a) of the Criminal Act, Articles 352 and 347(1) (a) of the Criminal Act, and Article 70(1)3 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes with respect to each credit specialized financial business (including the use of stolen credit cards and each credit card).