1. homicide;

From December 2014, 2014, the Defendant ○○○○ (n, 40 years of age) who was in a resistant relationship with the Defendant was frightened to frightly frightly frightly frightly frightly frightly frightly frightly frightly frightly frightly frightly frightenly frightly frightly frightenly frightly frightenly frightly frightly frightly frightly frightly frightly frightly frightly frightly frightly frighten, but frightly frightly frightened with the said cargo vehicle, the Defendant frightened with the said cargo vehicle.

At around 04:00 on January 26, 2015, the Defendant: (a) reported the victim’s scambling of the tools in the vehicle and scambling the complaint; and (b) however, the victim scambling “the scambling the scam to death.” (the scambling of the scam to death), scam the scam of the scam to death; (cam the scaming of the scam to death; (d) scam the scaming of the scam to death; (d) scam the scambling of the scam to death; (e) scam the scam of the scam to death; (e) scam the scam of the scam to death; and (e) scam the son’s face to scam the son’s body to k.

Accordingly, the Defendant murdered the victim.

2. Concealment of carcasses;

On January 26, 2015, at around 04:00, the Defendant killed the victim as described in paragraph (1), and loaded the cargo vehicles listed in paragraph (1) in the vicinity of the Doncheon Bridge located in the coast of Jeju, as stated in paragraph (1), and on the same day, the Defendant loaded the victim’s body into the Doncheon Bridge located adjacent to the coast of Jeju, approximately two kilometers away from the above place on the same day.

Then, at around 07:00 on the same day, the Defendant moved the body to the bottom of the tin bridge near Docheon, moved the body to the ground below 07:00 on the 29th day of the same month, moved the body to the ground under the above tin embankment, covered the 6th day's width of soil on the 30th day of the same month, and covered the 14th day's quantity of soil on the 14th day of the same month.

Accordingly, the defendant concealed the body of the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each protocol concerning the examination of the accused by the prosecution;

1. Statement of each police statement on this △△ and Kim ○○;

1. Each protocol of seizure;

1. A report on internal investigation (the screen of CCTV images in front of the ○○○ Head), a report on internal investigation (the search of the house of ○○○○○○○○) and a report on investigation;

(A) A letter of request for each appraisal and response, and a written appraisal of autopsy;

1. Report on internal investigation (including the details of currency), report on internal investigation (Attachment to resident inquiry and 112 report processing table), and report on internal investigation (j) ;

CCTV verification), report on internal investigation (verification of CCTV in front of an OO) and report on internal investigation (the vicinity of 000 waters)

CCTV confirmation), internal investigation report (a CCTV verification in the place of Gim○○), investigation report (vehicle identification and body)

Confirmation of place of abandonment), investigation report (Seizure of a suspect), investigation report (VV seizure and homicide)

A confirmation, investigation report (the result of autopsy of the victim's ○ body), investigation report (site verification), investigation report (site verification), and investigation report

(Attachment of a photograph on the excavation site of the corpse), investigation report (in-house verification of the suspected vehicle), investigation report (in-house report of the suspect);

The victim is identified in the place where the victim was sent to the vehicle, the investigation report (the details of the Kakao Stockholm dialogue between the suspect victims).

[Attachment] and its accompanying documents

Application of Statutes

1. Article applicable to criminal facts;

Article 250(1) of the Criminal Act (the occupation of murder and the choice of limited imprisonment) and Article 161(1) of the Criminal Act (the concealment of dead body)

point)

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

Articles 37 (former part), 38 (1) 2, and 50 (Punishment heavier than punishment) of the Criminal Act

Aggravation of concurrent crimes within the scope of the aggregate of the two crimes)

Reasons for sentencing

1. Scope of punishment by law: Not less than five years but not more than 37 years;

2. Application of the sentencing criteria;

(a) A primary crime;

[Determination of Punishment] Types 2 (Ordinary homicide)

[Scope of Recommendation] Basic Field, 10 years to 16 years

【General Convicts】

-Aggravation: Abandonment of dead bodies

(b)The crime of concealing the corpse is not subject to the sentencing criteria of the Supreme Court Sentencing Committee;

(c) Recommendations given according to the standards for dealing with multiple crimes: Ten years to thirty years.

Crimes on which sentencing criteria are set and those on which no sentencing criteria are set are concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act.

Since the sentencing criteria are related, the lower limit of the crime of murder shall be observed, and the punishment shall be imposed.

consideration.

3. Determination of sentence: 25 years of imprisonment; and

피고인은 이 사건 당일 약 7~8년 간 함께 동거해오던 사이인 피해자가 '친구와 술 약속이 있으니 집에 가지 않겠다.'고 거부하는데도 화물차를 운전하여 수목원과 애조로 일대를 운행하다, 피해자가 자신을 무시한다는 이유로 새벽 4:00경 인적이 드문 도로 위에서 혈중알코올농도가 0.229 % 에 이를 정도로 만취하여 제대로 반응을 하지 못하는 피해자의 얼굴을 주먹으로 때리고, 허리를 숙인 피해자의 몸통과 머리를 강하게 걷어 찼다. 피고인의 폭행으로 피해자의 머리 오른 마루부위에 길이 2㎝의 찢긴 상처, 얼굴 의 이마, 콧등, 왼쪽 광대 부위의 표재성 피부 까짐, 오른쪽 눈두덩, 오른쪽 광대부위에 멍 , 오른쪽 가슴부위에 44.5㎝의 멍이 발견되었고, 부검결과 피해자의 우측 두정부에 별모양의 좌열창, 전두부, 좌측 두정부, 우측 후두부 총 4개소에 두피하출혈, 좌측 흉부 중앙 , 복부 중앙 등에 피하 출혈과 비장이 파열된 상태임이 확인되었다. 피해자는 이 사건 당시 위와 같은 상해로 피고인에게 전혀 반항을 할 수 없었을 것으로 보이는데, 피고인은 피해자의 목을 경부 갑상연골의 양쪽 상각이 골절될 정도로 강하게 졸랐고, 피해자는 이로 인하여 경부압박에 의한 질식으로 사망하였다. 위와 같은 피고인의 일 련의 행동을 보아, 피고인에게 이 사건 당시 피해자에 대한 강한 적대감 및 살인의 확 정적 고의가 있었음을 인정할 수 있다.

According to the statement of the first police defendant interrogation protocol against the defendant, the defendant made a statement to the effect that "When the dynamics of the victim are faced by the victim, it was clear how the brue of the victim would be able to kill the victim, and it was thought that the brue will be dead." As a result of his violence, there is a strong doubt as to whether the victim was injured, or because of the occurrence of these crimes or fear of the victim's report, it is not to murder the victim.

On January 26, 2015, the Defendant: (a) had been able to kill the victim on two occasions; (b) had been 20 times away from the victim’s body; (c) had been covered by the 20-day soil above the body; and (d) had been living together with the victim, and (d) had been 20 days away from the victim’s body; (c) had been 20 days away from the victim’s body; and (d) had been 1 days away from the victim’s body to the victim’s body; (d) had been 5 days away from the victim’s body; and (e) had been 1 days away from the victim’s body to the victim’s body; and (e) had been 2 days away from the victim’s body to the victim’s body; and (e) had been 1 days away from the victim’s body to the victim’s body to the victim’s body; and (e) had been 2 days away from the victim’s body to the victim’s body.

The occurrence of a serious consequence that the injured party’s life, which cannot be altered due to the instant crime, has occurred from this land. The pain of the injured party’s family who lost the injured party per day, in particular, the parent’s mind that is leading to the awareness of a cruel crime, cannot be expressed verbally. The Defendant did not receive a letter from the injured party’s bereaved family members, and the bereaved family members of the injured party want to be punished against the Defendant. Considering this point, the Defendant is not sentenced to a severe sentence.

In addition, the punishment as ordered shall be determined by comprehensively taking into account all the sentencing factors shown in the pleadings of this case, such as the defendant's age, character and conduct, family environment, circumstances after the crime, and the fact that the defendant makes a confession of the crime late.

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.

Manyman;

Jinsia