beta
(영문) 광주고등법원 2013.07.18 2013노229

살인등

Text

Defendant

In addition, all appeals filed by the respondent for attachment order and the prosecutor are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant and the person to whom the attachment order was requested (hereinafter “Defendant”) (hereinafter “Defendant”) had no or weak ability to discern things or make decisions under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing the crime.

(2) The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant (30 years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence imposed by the Defendant is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. Determination on the part of the defendant's case

A. According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court as to the Defendant’s mental and physical disorder claim, the Defendant was deemed to have a drinking condition at the time of committing the instant crime, but, in light of the following: (a) the Defendant was deemed to have had no ability to discern things or make decisions under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing the instant crime; (b) the Defendant’s act before and after committing the instant crime; and (c) the Defendant, after killing the victim, took a cremation to prevent the victim from returning to and suffering from the victim’s face; and (d) he left the scene of the crime

Since the defendant's mental and physical disability cannot be seen to be a state or weak one, the defendant's argument is without merit.

B. (1) The Defendant and the prosecutor’s argument on the unfair sentencing of the Defendant and the prosecutor (i) the favorable normal Defendant committed a crime, committed a mistake, and did not appear to have been committed in a planned or cruel manner.

(2) The Defendant, at a disadvantage, was released on August 12, 201 and was released on October 20, 201, and the parole period was expired on October 20, 201, on the ground that the period of parole expired, he/she again committed murder since the day when the parole period expired.

The crime of this case was committed by murdering the victim's stroke on the ground that the victim's strokes another male, and is accompanied by the motive, background, and means of the previous crime of murder.