logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2018.05.24 2018고단371
특수절도
Text

Defendant

The imprisonment with prison labor for ten months and the imprisonment for the defendant B shall be set forth in six months, respectively.

except that this judgment.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The Defendants, who shared their roles and opened a disguised saw-to-sto-sto-sto-sto-sto-sto-sto-s to-s to-be, had the victim E withdrawn a large amount of gambling money, and Defendant B planned to steal a large amount of cash between the victim and the victim, as the victim B borrowed money to the victim.

On April 12, 2013, at around 12:00, the Defendants: (a) released 30,000 won in cash, which is cash 30,000 capital, from the victim and the high saw, the Defendants: (b) induced the victim to face her money for gambling; (c) caused the victim to face her money for gambling; and (d) Defendant A stolen her cash 30,000 won from the victim’s possession.

Accordingly, the Defendants jointly stolen 30 million won of cash owned by the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Statement protocol by the police for E;

1. The application of Acts and subordinate statutes to verify the identity of fingerprints in the theft case and report on investigation thereof;

1. Article 331 (2) and (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense;

1. Reduction of a small amount under Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act;

1. Grounds for sentencing under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act for suspended sentence;

1. Where the scope of recommended punishment (the scope of recommended punishment) according to the sentencing guidelines is [the defendants] the basic area (six months to one year and six months) of the theft of general property (special mitigation) [special mitigation] / Where the crime is systematically shared (excluding habitual offenders)

2. The Defendants not only contributed to the organized crime against the victims, but also the amount of damage.

On the other hand, the Defendants recognized the instant crime and expressed that the victim did not want to punish the Defendants by paying all the amount of damage to the victim.

In this case.

arrow