logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2013.10.08 2013노2601
특수강도등
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The court below accepted the facts charged and convicted the defendant, even though the defendant did not have any intention to robbery at the time of the crime in the course of erroneous judgment of facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment of the court below by misconception of facts.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court (three years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and adopted by the court below as to the assertion of mistake of facts, i.e.,: (a) the Defendant was putting the kitchen blade in the kitchen prior to the instant case; (b) the Defendant did not speak at the exact destination while taking the front line of the taxi; and (c) the Defendant did not have any special usage at the destination; (d) the Defendant threatened the Defendant with the cab in accordance with the Defendant’s instructions when the Defendant was living in the vicinity of the destination; and (d) the Defendant was able to sufficiently recognize that the Defendant had the intention to commit robbery at the time of the instant case by taking advantage of the knife and driving the knife while getting out of the taxi; and (e) the Defendant could not find any illegality in the process of fact-finding and judgment by the court below; and therefore, this part of the Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

B. As to the assertion on unreasonable sentencing, the Defendant’s mistake is divided and against himself, and the Defendant, at the time of the instant crime, was in a state of mental suffering from alcohol addiction, and the Defendant appears to have committed the instant crime in an economically difficult situation, etc. are factors for sentencing favorable to the Defendant.

On the other hand, the crime of this case concerns the defendant's knife with a knife while under the influence of alcohol while driving a taxi while driving the taxi in front of another person's building.

arrow