특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(절도)등
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal (the mental and physical weak and unfair sentencing);
A. Since the Defendant was suffering from unexplosion due to traffic accidents, and the occurrence of a thieve criminal intent due to the unexplosion, the Defendant was in a state of mental and physical weakness for which it is difficult to determine a normal accident at the time of committing the crime.
B. The sentencing of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (one year and six months of imprisonment) is excessively unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. The Defendant’s judgment on the assertion of mental and physical weakness is deemed to have received one-year medical treatment due to traffic accident, but the following circumstances acknowledged by the court below and the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court below, i.e., (i) a situation in which it is impossible to suppress the impulse of larceny due to the non-faceted evidence alleged by the Defendant, or (ii) a habit of larceny was discovered.
There is no basis to see that there is no reason to see, ② the Defendant shouldered the victim’s door door glass or removed the crime prevention window, and stolen goods by entering the residence, and considering the method of the crime, the Defendant committed the larceny by reporting the property.
In light of the fact that it is difficult to see that the Defendant had been punished several times for the same kind of crime under similar veterinary laws even before the instant case, and that it appears that the investigative agency specifically made statements about the background of the instant crime and the situation at the time of the instant crime, etc., and that the Defendant had a weak ability to distinguish things or make decisions due to the aftermath or influence of traffic accidents.
shall not be deemed to exist.
Therefore, this part of the defendant's assertion is rejected.
B. The sentencing of a judgment on an unfair assertion of sentencing is based on statutory penalty, and the sentencing conditions under Article 51 of the Criminal Act are equally considered within the reasonable and appropriate scope.