(영문) 수원지방법원 2016.11.23 2016노2377 | 리걸엔진

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 수원지방법원 2016.11.23 2016노2377

절도등

Text

All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (the first instance court: the imprisonment of 1 year and 2 months, the second instance court: the imprisonment of 8 months and the third instance court: the imprisonment of 6 months) is too unreasonable.

2. Before determining the grounds for appeal ex officio, this Court tried to concurrently examine the appeal cases of the court below Nos. 1, 2, and 3 against the defendant. Each of the offenses committed by the court below, which were tried in the trial, is a concurrent offense relationship under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and shall be sentenced to a single sentence within the scope of the term of punishment, which has increased concurrent offenses pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. In this regard, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained.

3. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing, and it is again decided as follows.

[Discied Judgment] The facts constituting an offense and the summary of evidence recognized by the court are identical to the facts constituting an offense and the summary of evidence. Thus, they are cited in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Article 329 of the Criminal Act, Articles 329 of the Criminal Act, Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act, Article 70 (1) 3 of the Specialized Credit Finance Business Act, and the choice of imprisonment for a crime;

1. Among concurrent crimes, each of the crimes of this case for the reason of sentencing under the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act is the theft of another's property and the theft of property by using a stolen credit card, and the crime is not good in light of the number of victims, the frequency of crimes, and the repetition of crimes.

The victims did not recover from damage.

On the other hand, the defendant recognized each of the crimes of this case and reflected against it, and four times a week due to kidne disease.

참조조문

-여신전문금융업법 제70조 제1항 제3호

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 2016.12.07 2016노4968

-수원지방법원 2016.10.12 2016노558

-광주지방법원 2015.01.29 2014노1122

-수원지방법원 2016.10.05 2016노169

-광주지방법원 2015.05.14 2014노2681