(영문) 부산지방법원 2008.7.15.선고 2008고합198 판결

The seized Bank of Korea notes 10 (No. 8), 12,00 won notes of the Bank of Korea (No. 9), 1,000 won notes of the Bank of Korea, 2,000 won notes of modern department store merchandise coupons (No. 10), 1,000 won notes of modern department store merchandise couponss (No. 11), 1 (No. 12), 1,000 won notes of piracy, 2 (No. 13), 3,000 won notes of the Korean Red Cross cultural merchandise coupons of Korea (No. 14), 2,000 won notes of the Korean Culture Promotion merchandise coupons of Korea (No. 15) shall be returned to the injured party's name in whose name the injured party is named.

Reasons

Criminal facts

On March 30, 2004, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes in Busan District Court, and on April 17, 2006, sentenced to one year of imprisonment with prison labor for the same crime in the same court on April 17, 2006, and on November 4, 2006, more than five previous convictions in Jin prison than the completion of the execution of the sentence.

1. On March 29, 2008, around 18:20 on March 29, 2008, the Defendant: (a) on the underground shopping mall located in the Busan High-dong, Busan High-gu; (b) reported that two females are to sell goods; and (c) accessed the goods following the sale.

The Defendant, who is unable to know one of the names of the victims, was deprived of the total amount of 93,000 won, including 42,000 won in cash owned by the victim and 51,000 won in gift certificates owned by the victim.

2. At around 18:35 on the same day, the Defendant moved back to B of the injured party who was taking clothes at the b's stores in the above underground shopping mall.

피고인은 옷을 고르는 척하면서 위 피해자의 숄더백에서 그녀 소유의 한국은행권 1천원권 5장, 엘지카드 1장, 기업은행 비씨카드 1장, 우리은행 카드 1장이 들어있던 시가 3만원 상당의 분홍색 반지갑 1개를 꺼내어 가 절취하였다. 이로써 피고인은 위와 같이 2회에 걸쳐 상습으로 위 피해자들의 재물을 절취하였다.

Summary of Evidence

Omission

Application of Statutes

1. Article applicable to criminal facts;

Article 5-4 (6) and (1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, and Article 329 of the Criminal Act

1. Aggravation for repeated crimes;

Articles 35 and proviso of Article 42 of the Criminal Act

1. Discretionary mitigation;

Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act (each consideration, such as the fact that a pond is pened in depth, and that part of a theft is returned to the injured party)

1. Inclusion of days of detention in detention;

Article 57 of the Criminal Act

1. Return:

Judgment on the defendant's argument under Article 333 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

The Defendant alleged to the effect that the Defendant was in a state of mental disability due to the mental illness caused by a thieve disorder at the time of committing the instant crime. However, according to each of the aforementioned evidence, the Defendant’s mental illness does not seem to have the ability to discern things at the time of committing the instant crime, and thus, the Defendant’s above assertion is rejected.