logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2015.10.15 2015노3121
특수절도등
Text

All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The lower court found the Defendants guilty of all of the charges, even though the remainder of the crimes except 8 and 9 from among the crimes of special larceny of this case by mistake of facts did not constitute a crime committed by the Defendants.

B. Each sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (Article 7 and 8 of the Judgment of the Defendant A: Imprisonment of two months, imprisonment of one year and six months, confiscation, and imprisonment of one year and six months, one year and six months, and one year and six months) is unfair.

2. Determination

A. According to the judgment of the court below and the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of mistake of facts, the defendants were consistent with the routes that are not the vehicles using the crime of this case and the routes that are no longer covered by drainage, and the defendant A remodeled the instant Lone Star vehicle without permission for the crime of this case, and the defendants stated that they had late return to the place where the damage was caused by the crime of this case, and that they had at the latest returned to the place where the damage was caused, but it is difficult to understand that they had the place of sale of the agricultural machinery at night, but they purchased the seized multiple cover, but they did not make a statement about the correct purchasing place, but they did not make a statement about the correct purchasing place, taking into account the following: (a) the defendants were led to a confession of all the facts of the crime in the prosecutor's office and denied the fact that the defendant A had denied the crime; and (b) the remaining facts of the crime can be sufficiently recognized, the defendants' assertion of mistake of facts in this case is without merit.

B. The Defendants denied most of the facts charged and did not reflect on the issue of special larceny; Defendant A did not recover damage; Defendant A was a criminal act during the period of repeated crime by larceny; and Defendant B’s fraud.

arrow