logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2017.08.18 2016노1926
절도등
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendant, on April 2014, at the time of residence of the lowerman C in his/her own land, has not been abandoned and walked with vinyl.

In addition, although there is a fact that the defendant was permanently stationed on November 3, 2014, there is no fact that he has followed the reduction of salary, which is deep on the land B owned by C, and the land B is used as a debate, and the reduction of salary is not serious.

Nevertheless, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts and finding all guilty of the facts charged.

2. The defendant, who has duly adopted and finished the examination of evidence at the court below, alleged that the evidence presented by the court below is inadmissible, but there is no problem in the admissibility of evidence that has been adopted according to due process.

In full view of B, B,420 square meters (hereinafter referred to as “B”) at the time of residence is owned by the victim C. Although the land category was “responding”, the Defendant was used as a dry field in G, and the Defendant was extracted from a dry field located in G and walked with a vinyl. On November 3, 2014 with D’s aid, it can be acknowledged that the maximum amount of 30 square meters in a dry field located in G is harvested.

The Defendant harvested the reduction of salary at the bar;

There is a question as to whether the ownership of the N10 square meters of a road at the permanent address (hereinafter referred to as the “N land”) at the time of residence is insufficient to harvest the level of 30 gambling with a small size of the area, and is likely to cause a decrease in the 2014 square meters of the land at the road.

In light of the circumstances that erroneously state the B land portion from the data submitted by the defendant as the N-land portion, the defendant may be able to make an error on the land.

Comprehensively taking account of all the facts and circumstances acknowledged above, the Defendant’s land B owned by the victim C at each time indicated in the facts charged.

arrow