beta
Text
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than three years and six months.
is set forth in subparagraph 2 ( excessive) of seized evidence.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The Defendant did not commit a crime identical to this part of the facts charged (at night, theft by intrusion at residence (2016 Gohap 396)).
B. Mental and physical weakness (the robbery and special intimidation (the 2016 Highest 384 Incident) were in the state of having weak ability to discern things or make decisions due to mental illness, such as depression and yellow disorder.
(c)
The punishment of the court below (4 years of imprisonment) which is unfair in sentencing is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. On March 27, 2016, the Defendant, at around 02:44, opened and intruded the entrance that was not corrected in front of the residence of the victim G in Ulsandong-gu F2, Ulsan-gu, U.S., 2016. On the other hand, the Defendant continued to cut off the victim’s H cash amounting to KRW 50,000 at the market price where the victim’s cash amounting to KRW 170,000 was located in the inside and outside of the entrance, and cut off the victim’s H at the small book, and continued to cut off the victim’s H cash amounting to KRW 380,000 at the market price managed by the victim H on the cell’s book.
2) The lower court’s judgment: (a) was established at the scene of crime;
The face of the offender taken from U Home Camp CCTV is considerably similar to that of the Defendant; ② the offender taken out from the scene of the crime and entered into the Defendant’s residence located in Ulsandong-gu, Ulsan-gu, U.S. as a house for crime prevention around the scene of the crime; ③ the knives and knts similar to the knives worn in the scene of the crime and the knives and knives were found in the Defendant’s residence; ④ the Defendant’s knives and knives were found in the Defendant’s residence, ④ the Defendant’s knives and knives were used on the day of the crime, and the knives were dead to the degree of force at the time of the crime. Therefore, it is difficult to believe the Defendant’s assertion that it was impossible to avoid the crime.