logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.08.24 2014고정5576
절도
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 300,000.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won shall be one day.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On May 16, 2014, according to the witness G’s statement, etc. held by the heir of the deceased, who was parked at the 'E' factory located in Gangseo-gu Busan Metropolitan City, the pro-friendly net D, around May 11, 2014, the Defendant appears to have succeeded to the deceased’s property due to the waiver of inheritance (including the argument of the defendant and his defense counsel), but at least the defendant appears not to have succeeded to the deceased’s property (including the argument of the defendant and his defense counsel). Thus, the vehicle of this case still constitutes another’s property.

In addition, even if the above facts of crime are partially accepted, it does not cause substantial disadvantage to the defendant's exercise of his right to defense.

The franchise was stolen by driving a cre in which XG F car has been neglected to monitor, and by driving it.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of witness G;

1. Partial statement of the police interrogation protocol of the accused;

1. Some statements in the police statement concerning G;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the comprehensive details of vehicles;

1. Article 329 of the Criminal Act and Article 329 of the Criminal Act concerning the crime, the choice of fines;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. Judgment on the assertion by the defendant and his/her defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. As to the assertion regarding the waiver of inheritance, the defendant and his defense counsel asserted that the effect of G, a complainant of the deceased D, was the retroactive effect of not the heir at the time of death by giving up inheritance. The next-order heir is the mother H, a lineal blood relative of the defendant, so the decision of exemption from punishment should be sentenced, or that the rejection of prosecution should be sentenced as the complaint is illegal due to the waiver of inheritance.

The provisions concerning crimes between relatives under Article 328 of the Criminal Act, which are applied mutatis mutandis by Article 344 of the Criminal Act, shall be between the offender and the owner and occupant of the damaged goods.

arrow