[준강도][집31(1)형,232;공1983.5.1.(703),679]
The case holding that quasi-Robbery constitutes violence or intimidation in the crime of robbery
In the event that the victim, who led the Otoba and led the Otoba, made the flab and threatened the victim's face with the aim of evading arrest, and threatened the victim to die without being unleashed, such assault and intimidation constitute assault and intimidation to an extent that it is objectively acceptable as a means to suppress the victim's resistance, and thus constitutes quasi-Robbery.
Article 335 of the Criminal Act
Defendant
Defendant
Attorney Kim Yong-young
Seoul High Court Decision 82No2300 delivered on October 8, 1982
The appeal is dismissed.
The defendant's grounds of appeal are examined.
According to the facts duly confirmed by the court below, the defendant's assault and intimidation constitutes a quasi-Robbery under Article 335 of the Criminal Act, and the court below also concluded that the defendant's act constitutes a quasi-Robbery under Article 335 of the Criminal Act, since the defendant's act of assault and intimidation constitutes assault and intimidation to a general and objective extent that is recognized as possible by means of suppressing the victim's resistance, and the defendant's act of assault and intimidation constitutes a quasi-Robbery under Article 335 of the Criminal Act. Since the court below concluded that the defendant's act of robbery constitutes a quasi-Robbery under Article 335 of the Criminal Act, the defendant's act of assault and intimidation, which constitutes the element of quasi-Robbery, cannot be adopted.
Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.
Justices Yoon Il-young (Presiding Justice)