2015Do18091 A. Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a group, deadly weapons, etc.)

(b) Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (collectively known as a deadly weapon, etc.;

(c) Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a collective threat, deadly weapon, etc.);

(Special Intimidation for Recognized Crime)

(d) Violation of the Narcotics Control Act;

(e) Damage to property;

(f) Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act;

A

Defendant

Attorney S (National Ship)

Changwon District Court Decision 2015No856 Decided October 29, 2015

February 18, 2016

The judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Changwon District Court Panel Division.

1. The grounds of appeal are examined.

Examining the reasoning of the judgment below in light of the evidence duly admitted, the defendant of this case

The judgment of the court below that it did not reach the state of mental illness at the time of crime

As such, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principle or exceeding the bounds of free evaluation of evidence.

There is no error of law as to judgment.

2. The decision shall be made ex officio;

A. The former Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (amended by Act No. 12896, Dec. 30, 2014)

section 3(1) of the former Punishment of Violence Act (hereinafter referred to as the "former Punishment of Violences Act") means the power of an organization or a group.

(1) An offense listed in paragraph (1) of Article 2 shall be committed by showing the power of any organization or group;

Any person who commits a crime by carrying a deadly weapon or other dangerous articles, or who commits the crime by carrying such weapon or other dangerous articles, shall be subject to subparagraphs of Article 2

Article 2(1)3 of the Criminal Act provides that “A punishment shall be imposed in accordance with the same manner as the case may be,” and Article 2(1)3 of the same Act provides that

piracy), Article 257(2) of the Criminal Act, and Article 276(2) of the Criminal Act

On January 6, 2016, the Act stipulated that a person who committed a crime shall be punished by imprisonment for a limited term of at least three years.

Article 3(1) of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act amended and enforced by Act No. 13718

No. 13719 shall be amended by Act No. 13719 on the same day in order to prevent the gap of punishment.

Article 258-2 (Special Bodi Injury) of the Criminal Code in force is newly established and "a group or multiple status" in paragraph (1).

When a person commits a crime under Article 257 (1) or (2) by showing evidence or carrying a dangerous weapon.

The term "a person shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for not less than one year but not more than ten years."

As such, "Saly weapons and other dangerous articles" under Article 3 (1) of the former Punishment of Violences Act shall be carried out.

The deletion of the part regarding "a person who commits a crime under Article 276(2) of the Criminal Code" means a person who commits a crime under Article 276(2).

Similar to the above provisions of the Criminal Act, the elements of a crime are prescribed by statutory penalty only.

Article 3(1) of the former Punishment of Violences Act, carrying a deadly weapon or other dangerous articles, and the Criminal Act

"A person who commits a crime under any provision of Articles 260 (1), 283 (1), and 366 (1)."

Constitutional materials recognized as unconstitutional by losing the legitimacy and balance of the punishment system with respect to the part concerning the punishment system.

It shall not be punished as a penal provision which is unconstitutional, reflecting the purpose of the decision of the board of directors.

In addition, the increase in Article 257(2) of the Criminal Act as above should be seen as an anti-sexual measure.

In lieu of deletion of Article 3(1) of the former Punishment of Violences Act, which provides for an appropriate constituent element, the same shall apply.

Newly inserted Article 258-2(1) of the Criminal Act to the effect that the statutory punishment of the constituent elements is an act of violence.

The provision of Article 3 (1) of the Punishment Act is lower than that of the above aggravated constituent elements, and also has a mark of the above aggravated constituent elements.

Even if anti-competitive risks are considered, the circumstances leading to the individual crime, the specific form of act and infringement of legal interests;

Although the degree of significance is very diverse, it is uniformly aggravated by imprisonment for a limited term of at least three years.

It shall be deemed that the previous penal provision is an anti-sexual measure from the excessive emphasis on the previous penal provision.

This is the case.

Therefore, all of them are committed by a change of law after a crime under Article 1 (2) of the Criminal Code.

Since the above does not constitute a crime or the sentence is more severe than that of the old law, the above provision shall apply.

D New Law shall apply (Supreme Court Decision 2009Do12930 Decided March 11, 2010; Supreme Court Decision 2013 Decided March 11, 2013).

7. Supreme Court Decision 2013Do4862, 2013 Jeondo101 Decided November 11, 201

B. (1) Of the facts charged in the instant case, the lower court carried a knife, which is a dangerous article of the Defendant.

Article 3 of the former Punishment of Violences Act regarding the act of inflicting bodily injury on the victim who is a lineal ascendant of the spouse.

Paragraph (1) and Paragraph (1)3 of Article 2, Paragraph (2) of Article 257 of the Criminal Act, and Paragraph (b) of Article 257

Articles 3(1) and 2(1)3 of the former Punishment of Violences Act on the act of detaining the above victim

In applying subparagraph, Article 276(2) of the Criminal Act, the determination of guilty as to all the remaining charges together with each other

was made.

However, according to the above legal principles, each of the above charges is subject to Article 1(2) of the Criminal Act.

As such, the judgment below cannot be punished by the provisions of the former Punishment of Violences Act, a juristic person at the time of action.

No longer can no longer be maintained.

(2) On the other hand, the first instance judgment maintained by the court below is based on the above facts charged and the remaining facts charged.

Since a sentence was rendered on the ground that there is a concurrent relationship under the former part of Article 37, the lower court ultimately rendered a single sentence.

All judgments must be reversed.

3. Therefore, without examining the remaining grounds of appeal, we reverse the judgment below, and the case is remanded.

In other words, the case is remanded to the lower court for further proceedings consistent with this Opinion. It is so decided by the assent of all participating Justices.

It is decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Kim In-bok

Justices Kim In-bok, Counsel for the defendant

Justices Park Young-young

Justices Kim Jong-il