logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구고법 2007. 3. 2.자 2007초기5 결정
[재판의집행에관한이의] 재항고[각공2007.4.10.(44),936]
Main Issues

[1] The method of executing punishment in a case where two life imprisonment punishments are separately sentenced and finalized for each crime which constitutes ex post concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the former Criminal Code

[2] The case where the prosecutor's disposition ordering the execution of life imprisonment which became final and conclusive even though the execution of life imprisonment which became final and conclusive was revoked on the ground that it was unlawful

Summary of Judgment

[1] Article 39(1) and (2) and Article 38(1)1 of the former Criminal Code (amended by Act No. 7623, Jul. 29, 2005) are to be executed in the case where several sentences are declared and finalized with regard to the case of ex post concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37, according to the punishment for concurrent crimes. Thus, when two separate types of life imprisonment have been sentenced for each crime of ex post concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the former Criminal Code (amended by Act No. 7623, Jul. 29, 2005); Article 39(1) and (2) and Article 38(1)1 of the former Criminal Code (amended by Act No. 7623, Jul. 29, 2005).

[2] The case where the prosecutor's disposition ordering the execution of life imprisonment which became final and conclusive even though the execution of life imprisonment which became final and conclusive was revoked on the ground that it was unlawful

[Reference Provisions]

[1] Articles 37, 38(1)1, and 39(1) and (2) of the former Criminal Act (amended by Act No. 7623 of July 29, 2005), and Article 39(2) of the Addenda (amended by Act No. 7623 of July 29, 2005) / [2] Articles 37, 38(1)1, and 39(1) and (2) of the former Criminal Act (amended by Act No. 7623 of July 29, 2005), Articles 489 and 491 of the Criminal Procedure Act

Applicant

Applicant

Representative

Attorney Go-Name et al.

Text

The main nature of the prosecutor's office in Daegu District Public Prosecutor's Office shall be revoked on April 12, 1982 by the head of Daegu Correctional Institution from 1982No 239 to the head of Daegu Correctional Institution.

Reasons

According to the records, on July 2, 1980, the applicant was sentenced to imprisonment for life for habitual special robbery, robbery and special robbery in Busan District Court on October 8, 1980, and the dismissal of the appeal was confirmed on January 13, 1981 by the Supreme Court on the same day (hereinafter referred to as "Type I"), and the prosecutor of the Supreme Prosecutors' Office transferred to the Supreme Court on January 13, 1981, directed the head of Daegu Prison on January 13, 1981 to execute the first sentence on September 13, 198, by stating that he was sentenced to imprisonment for life for two years from the Daegu District Court on December 29, 198, and that he was sentenced to imprisonment for two years from the date on which he was sentenced to imprisonment for life for two years from the Daegu District Court on July 10, 198, and that he was sentenced to imprisonment for two years from the date on which he was sentenced to imprisonment for two years from the Daegu District Court on March 1, 1981981.

Article 39(1) and (2), and Article 38(1)1 of the former Criminal Act (amended by Act No. 7623, Jul. 29, 2005; hereinafter “former Act”) are to be executed in accordance with the case of concurrent crimes in which multiple sentences are declared and finalized with respect to each of the following concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the former Criminal Act (amended by Act No. 7623, Jul. 29, 2005; hereinafter “former Act”). Thus, as in the instant case, where two of the following concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the former Act are separately sentenced and finalized, only one life imprisonment should be executed in accordance with each provision of Article 39(1) and (2), and Article 38(1)1 of the former Act.

Therefore, even though the execution of life imprisonment for the first type has already started, the disposition of the prosecutor who directed the execution of life imprisonment for the second type, is to be revoked, and it is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Lee Kang-won (Presiding Judge) (Presiding Judge)

arrow