logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2013.09.05 2013노2743
특수절도등
Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Although the Defendant led the Defendant to commit the instant crime, he did not seriously reflect his mistake, and was responsible to the other Defendants. Each of the instant crimes is an act that severely undermines the fairness of election procedures selected by the occupant representatives and undermines the trust among the occupants. However, the Defendant is the primary offender who has no criminal record in the past. Co-defendant C of the lower court, who was elected to the occupant representative by the instant illegal election, voluntarily surrenders himself to the commission of each of the instant crimes, and then resigned from the representative, taking into account the following factors: the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, family environment, background, method and consequence of the instant crime; the circumstances before and after the commission of each of the instant crimes; and the sentencing conditions indicated in the instant records and arguments, such as imprisonment, which was sentenced by the lower court (one year probation, two years of probation, two years of probation, and 240 hours of probation), it cannot be deemed unreasonable.

2. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

However, among the "Application of Acts and subordinate statutes" in the judgment of the court below, "Article 331(1), Articles 231, 234, 231, 31, 314(1), 313, and 30 of the Criminal Act," and "the choice of imprisonment" in the "Article 331(2) and Article 331(1) of the Criminal Act, Articles 231, 30 of the Criminal Act, Articles 234, 231, and 30 of the Criminal Act, Articles 234, 231, and 30 of the Criminal Act, Articles 314(1), 313, and 30 of the Criminal Act, Article 314(1), 313, and 30 of the Criminal Act, are apparent that the case is a clerical error in the ex officio rectification of the case in accordance with Article 25(1) of the Regulations on Criminal Procedure.

.

arrow