[1] Requirements for the establishment of robbery

[2] The case holding that the crime of robbery is established in the event a person who was carried out with a police box attached to the police officer immediately after the robbery was committed, and was killed with a police officer in an excessive manner to escape from arrest

[1] Robbery is established by murdering by robbery at an opportunity for robbery. Thus, the robbery is required to be conducted in a stage that can be deemed to have not been completed by social norms after the commission of robbery or immediately after the commission of robbery, or immediately after the abandonment of the criminal intent to commit robbery.

[2] The case holding that it is reasonable that the court below punished the defendant as robbery by applying robbery to the crime of robbery, since the police officer, who was dispatched by the report immediately after the robbery, was conducted in a state where the crime was not completed by social norms in extremely close vicinity to robbery, time and distance (it cannot be deemed that the defendant's body was completely detained due to arrest at the time of the murder) since the police officer discovered about about 150 points of the crime of robbery from the scene of the crime of robbery, discovered the defendant who escaped from the cargo vehicle, traced the patrol lane, and carried the defendant at the end of the robbery.

[1] Article 338 of the former Criminal Code (amended by Act No. 5057 of Dec. 29, 1995) / [2] Article 338 of the former Criminal Code (amended by Act No. 5057 of Dec. 29, 1995)

Defendant

Defendant

Attorney Kim Jong-hwan

Seoul High Court Decision 95No2824 delivered on April 16, 1996

The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal by the defendant and his defense counsel are also examined.

1. The robbery is established by murdering by robbery at an opportunity for robbery. Thus, the robbery is required to be conducted in a stage at which the criminal act is deemed not to have been completed under social norms after the commission of robbery or immediately after the commission of robbery, or immediately after the abandonment of the criminal intent to commit robbery.

According to the reasoning of the judgment below and the records, the police officer's moving, knbb, who received a report immediately after the robbery of this case, found the defendant from the scene of the crime at around 150 points of the above crime, from the point of the 150th place of the crime, and found the defendant who escaped from the cargo vehicle to the scene of the crime, and tracking the patrol lane, and attached the defendant at the end of the shooting. However, the defendant attempted to carry the defendant with the patrol box by saving the defendant at the patrol box without being able to take away too high resistance, while the defendant tried to carry the defendant into the patrol box, and the defendant was killed by the patrol box. Accordingly, if the facts are as above, it seems that the above murder of the defendant was done in extremely close to the robbery, time, and distance and thus, it seems that the crime was completed under social norms (it cannot be deemed that the defendant's body was completely detained at the time of the crime of robbery), and there is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles as to robbery, which is the crime of robbery by applying the judgment of the court below.

2. In light of the record, there is no evidence to deem that the Defendant was in a state of mental or physical disability or mental disability at the time of committing the robbery of this case. Thus, the argument is without merit.

3. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Cho Chang-tae (Presiding Justice)