[보호감호(특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반)][공1983.12.1.(717),1675]
(a) Examples which have recognized the risk of habitually repeating and recidivism;
B. As the ground of appeal, whether the new ground for dismissal of responsibility exists
A. The punishment was imposed on two occasions due to the previous retail machine crime, and the execution of the punishment was completed, and the crime was committed again at a retail time within one hundred days after the date of release from the maturity, and if the form of the crime, such as the method and means of the retail machine crime, is similar to that of the previous crime, the defendant is likely to habitually repeat and repeat the crime.
(b) If a claim on the denial of responsibility is not asserted in the fact-finding court, it may not be brought to the new ground for appeal.
A. Article 5 of the Social Protection Act
Applicant for Custody
Applicant for Custody
Attorney Shin Shin-chul
Daegu High Court Decision 83No563, 83No133 decided June 24, 1983
The appeal is dismissed.
The grounds of appeal by the defendant and his defense counsel are also examined.
According to the court below's lawful determination, since the defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for a short term of one year and six months for a short term of imprisonment with prison labor for a special larceny at the Busan District Court on April 14, 1978, and the above court on January 9, 1981 also sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for a two-year term for habitual special larceny due to the same retail machine crime, and the execution of each sentence is completed, and the above execution is ten days after the completion of the above final sentence, which is 10 days after the maturity, and there is no violation of the law of 10,000 won in total and 300,000 won in total as a result of the court below's decision of 10,000 won in prison and 10,000 won in retail machines before Busan High School and 10,000 won in total, and there is no violation of the law of 10,000 won in total as a result of the court below's appeal.
Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.
Justices Lee Il-young (Presiding Justice)