Whether the Defendant constitutes a deadly weapon or other dangerous article under Article 3(1) of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (affirmative)

The application of Article 3 (2) and (1) of the Punishment of Violence, etc. Act to the defendant's act of causing the victim's knife twice on the side is justifiable, and there is no argument in the appeal that the defendant's use does not constitute a crime of carrying dangerous articles because it cannot be viewed as a deadly weapon.

Article 3(1) of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act

Defendant

Defendant

Attorney Park Dong-young

Suwon District Court Decision 83No1107 delivered on October 21, 1983

The appeal is dismissed.

The number of detention days after an appeal shall be included in the calculation of the original sentence.

The grounds of appeal by the defendant and the public defender are also examined.

According to the facts affirmed by the judgment of the court of first instance, the defendant jointly with his accomplice at night 01:30, and committed violence against the victim at night and caused knife two times his own will, etc., so the court of first instance applied Article 3(2) and (1) of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act to the above act in its judgment is justifiable. The above defendant's crime is contingent and lacks decentralization, and the defendant's use of it does not constitute a crime carrying dangerous articles because it does not constitute a deadly weapon, and therefore, it is groundless that the court of first instance interpreted the Act on the Punishment of Violences, etc., since the defendant's use of it does not constitute a crime carrying dangerous articles.

In addition, the author argues that the court below's sentencing is excessive, but in this case where a sentence of less than 10 years has been imposed, the sentence of unfair sentencing cannot be a legitimate ground for appeal, in light of the provisions of Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, so there is no ground for appeal.

Therefore, the appeal shall be dismissed, and 40 days of detention days after the appeal shall be included in the original sentence. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices Lee Lee Sung-soo (Presiding Justice)