2014No264 homicide, bodily injury, theft

2014Electric No. 23 (Joint Attachment Orders)

A

Both parties

Stambling (prosecutions, public trials), Gu residents' flag (public trial)

Attorney AL (National Ship)

Ulsan District Court Decision 2013Gohap309, 2014Na33 (Consolidated Judgment 1) Decided April 11, 2014

October 16, 2014

The part of the judgment of the court below regarding the defendant case shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for 18 years.

The prosecutor's appeal regarding the attachment order case portion of the judgment below is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

(a) Defendant and the respondent for an attachment order (hereinafter referred to as “Defendant”);

The punishment sentenced by the court below (15 years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

(b) Prosecutors;

1) The part of the defendant case

A) misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles - The portion not guilty (homicide)

According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, it is sufficiently recognized that the defendant had the negligence of murder at the time of the crime of this case. Nevertheless, the court below found the defendant not guilty of murder on the ground that the defendant did not have the intention of murder, and found the defendant guilty of only the crime of bodily injury included therein. The court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on willful negligence or by misunderstanding the remaining facts in violation of the rules of evidence, which affected the

B) Unreasonable sentencing

The sentence of the court below is too unhued and unfair.

2) Part of the attachment order case

It is unreasonable that the court below dismissed the defendant's request for attachment order of the location tracking electronic device even though the defendant committed murder and the defendant's risk of recidivism is recognized.

2. Judgment on the prosecutor's misconception of facts and misapprehension of legal principles

A. Summary of the facts charged

around 08:40 on October 24, 2013, at the Defendant’s residence of Ulsan-gun, Ulsan-gun, F apartment 206 Dong 503, Ulsan-gun, the Defendant continuously exercised violence against the victim (the age of 7 at that time) as above, and was spared by the victim on the ground that the victim stolen and stolen the cash amounting to KRW 2,300 on the table for the purpose of frighting the wind, and then made a false statement again, until around 09:15 on the same day, the Defendant was frightd for about 35 minutes by drinking to the head of the victim, the victim’s side fright, and the part on the part of the victim (the year of 7 years old). (hereinafter “the first assault”).

Since then, at around 09:45 on the same day, the defendant, on the grounds that the victim's statement that the victim "I wish to do so," "I wish to do so," did not go against the stolen and stolen goods, and only want to do so, the victim again tried to resist his hair, side gate, etc. of the victim due to his own drinking and growth, and the victim complaining of suffering, such as the victim's hair and salvance, and the victim's face salking, such as the victim's head, side salking, and salving, and the victim's face 20 minutes of death until the death salket, such as the victim's head, side sal part, and ship (hereinafter "the second second second assault of this case").

As such, the Defendant, at around 11:00 on the same day, killed the victim by causing the victim to die of cage cage cages and malm malms at the above site with fage damage.

B. The judgment of the court below

The court below found that the defendant's act of assaulting and injuring the victim was hard to find out that the defendant's act of assaulting and injuring the victim's body constitutes an act of assaulting and injuring the victim's body, and it is hard to find that the defendant's act of assaulting and injuring the victim's body constitutes an act of assaulting and injuring the victim's body, i.e., the following circumstances acknowledged by evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, i., the defendant consistently denied the defendant's intention of murder from the police investigation stage to the court below, ii) there was no circumstance to see that the defendant's act of assaulting and injuring the victim's body was hard to find that the defendant's act of assaulting and injuring the victim's body was committed, and there is no possibility that the defendant's act of assaulting and injuring the victim's body could not be seen as an act of assaulting and injuring the victim's body, i.e., the defendant's act of killing the victim's body cannot be seen as an act of assaulting the victim's body.

C. The judgment of this Court

1) Relevant legal principles

The intent of murder is not necessarily recognized as a purpose of murder or a planned intention of murder. It is sufficient to recognize or anticipate the possibility or risk of causing the death of another person due to one’s own act, and its recognition or prediction is not only conclusive but also a so-called willful negligence. In a case where the defendant asserts that there was no criminal intent of murder at the time of committing the crime, and that there was only the criminal intent of murder, whether the defendant was a criminal intent of murder at the time of committing the crime should be determined by comprehensively taking into account the objective circumstances before and after committing the crime, such as the background leading up to committing the crime, motive, type and use of deadly weapons used, the part and repetition of attack, and the possibility of causing the death (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2008Do9867, Feb. 26, 2009).

2) Specific determination

In full view of the following facts acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the court below, the result of the examination of the body of the victim, the relationship between the defendant and the victim before the assault of this case, and the defendant's awareness and the intent of internal investigation at the time of the assault of this case, etc., it is reasonable to see that the defendant at the time of the assault of this case was aware or predicted that his act would have possibility or risk of causing the death of the victim, but did so as above. Thus, even if the defendant did not intend to commit murder, it shall be deemed that there was a willful negligence. Nevertheless, the court below determined that it is difficult to recognize that the defendant had a conclusive or negligent intention on the ground of the circumstances as stated in its reasoning. In so doing, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to the intention of murder or by misapprehending the legal principles as to the

Therefore, the prosecutor's argument pointing this out is with merit.

A) Death of the victim due to the instant 1 and 2 assault

(1) The credibility of the statements concerning the other party

The Defendant consistently stated from the investigative agency to the trial in the above facts charged that he sought the victim as shown in the above facts charged. The Defendant’s physical condition, intensity at time, and the victim’s condition after the use of violence, etc. not only conforms to the following victim’s body autopsy results and K’s statement, but also cannot be seen as containing any favorable contents to the Defendant himself, and thus credibility appears to exist. Therefore, the Defendant’s assertion that he made a non-discriminatory use of the victim due to drinking and shot during about 55 minutes as stated in the above facts charged cannot be acknowledged as it is (On the other hand, the prosecutor’s statement in the grounds of appeal that he stolen KRW 2,300 and stolen the victim’s body condition, which led the victim to be killed, and the prosecutor’s statement that the Defendant’s use of violence was caused by the Defendant’s use of violence against the victim’s victim’s victim, and the prosecutor’s assertion that the Defendant’s use of the aforementioned part of the facts charged as it did not constitute credibility of the part of this case’s charges.

(2) 피해자 사망원인 위와 같은 폭행과정에 대한 구체적이고 상세한 피고인의 진술에다가, 피해자의 사체 부검결과 및 부검의 K의 원심 법정진술, 법의학자 AM의 당심 법정진술 등에 의하여 인정되는 다음과 같은 사정 곧, ① 피해자의 왼쪽 몸통 측면부에서 12cm×12cm 범위의, 오른쪽 몸통 측면부에서 18cm×12cm 범위의 좌상이 각각 발견된 점, ② 피해자의 늑골 중 왼쪽 제8 ~ 11번 뒤쪽 부위, 왼쪽 제5, 6번 갈비뼈의 앞쪽과 측면부위 및 오른쪽 제4 ~ 9번 측면부위, 오른쪽 제7 ~ 10번 뒤쪽 부위에 골절 및 출혈이 있는 점, ③ 양쪽 흉곽 측면에 광범위한 피하 지방층 출혈이 있으며, 피해자의 양쪽 흉강에는 각각 200cc의 혈액이 고여 있는 점, ④ 우심실의 뒤쪽 벽에 심장 좌상이 발견되었고, 우심방과 우심실이 쭈그러져 들어가 있는 점, ⑤ 피해자의 오른쪽 폐 중엽, 하엽과 왼쪽 폐 상엽에서 폐 실질 파열 및 출혈이 발견된 점, ⑥ 피해자의 복강 내 실질장기 및 골반강에는 특기할 만한 손상이 없었으며, 기타 내부 실질 장기에서 사인으로 고려할 만한 병적 소견은 보이지 않는 점, ⑦⑦ 위와 같은 피해자의 늑골 골절은 골절의 형상과 출혈반응의 정도를 고려할 때 피고인의 폭행으로 인한 것으로 볼 것인 점(다만, 부검의 K은 왼쪽 5, 6번 갈비뼈의 경우 그 부위나 출혈반응이 미약한 점 등을 고려하면 심폐소생술 과정에서 골절되었을 가능성을 배제할 수 없다고 진술하고 있으나, 법의학자 AM은 어린 피해자의 늑골은 상당히 유연하기 때문에 심폐소생술 과정에서 골절되었다고 보기는 어렵다고 진술하고 있다) 등에 비추어 피해자는 피고인의 구타로 인해 흉부손상(늑골의 다발성·중복 골절, 양 폐 실질의 파열, 심장손상)에 의하여 사망에 이르렀다[피해자의 사인에 관하여, 부검의 K은 늑골의 다발성 · 중복 골절, 양 폐 실질의 파열로 보았으나, 위 AM은 그와 같은 사인 외에도 '심장 내에 소량의 혈액이 고여 있고 심장좌상이 관찰되며, 우심방과 우심실이 쭈그러져 들어가 있는 점'을 감안하면, 심장손상(심장탐폰(cardiac tamponade, 심장눌림증) 및 심장좌상도 사망의 원인이라고 보고 있는바, 피고인의 피해자 옆구리 부분에 대한 집중적인 가격이 피해자 사망의 원인이라는 점에서 결론은 동일하다.

B) Review of the circumstances of death

(1) Details of the defendant's statement

From the end of the second assault of this case, the Defendant consistently carried out 119 first time until the victim arrives at the scene by his report. The Defendant: “The father of the victim might be found, and the victim was seated down on the floor, and ordered the victim to take a bath against him; the victim was laid off from his clothes before his bath room, and the Defendant was able to open the bath room. The Defendant, who was not able to take a bath room for about one hour after the victim was able to take a bath again; the Defendant was able to take a bath again, and the victim was able to take a bath again, and the victim was able to take a bath again, and the victim was able to take a bath again, and the Defendant was able to take a bath so that the victim was able to take a bath at the scene, and the victim was able to take a bath again. The Defendant was able to take a bath at the time when she was able to do so.

(2) The credibility of the statement

With respect to the credibility of the above defendant's statement, it is recognized that the part where the defendant reported to 119 by telephone at 11:2 and carried out cardiopulmonary resuscitation in accordance with the guide of the Counseling Institute is true by a recorded recording file containing 119 currency. However, according to the following circumstances, according to the court's oral statement at K and the court's statement at law of AM, 16 parts of the body of the defendant (which occurred in the process of cardiopulmonary resuscitation and the 14 parts of the body of the defendant), it is difficult to accept that the defendant had a wide range of 14 parts of the body of the defendant's 7th anniversary of 14 parts of the body of the defendant's body of the body of the victim at the time of 19 minutes and 19 minutes of the body of the defendant's body of the victim's entrance at the time of 19 minutes and 19 minutes of the body of the victim's body of the victim, it is difficult for the defendant to take necessary measures for 20 minutes and 9 minutes of the victim's desire.

The evidence records 317-1 through 14) verify the state of victim's consciousness, and immediately take the emergency measures, and again took the cardiopulmonary resuscitation by phone 119, and the defendant's statement that the 119 first respond to the site of the 119 first responded to the 119 first respond to the 119 second response. The defendant's statement appears to have intentionally concealed the blood trace process or distorted the process that led to the emergency measures. As above, it is difficult for the victim to explain the reasons other than the victim's intention to conceal his own crime. In light of the above, the victim's statement on the criminal process, such as the victim who lost his consciousness, took out his own clothes and her desire to conceal his own crime, and took emergency measures for the victim who lost his consciousness, is highly doubtful, and there is no room to believe that the defendant actually arrives in the situation of the first and second violence of this case until 1199.

C) The extent of the use of violence and whether the defendant was aware

(1) The relationship between the Defendant and the victim prior to the instant assault

① The Defendant began to establish a de facto marital relationship with the father of the victim in a state of maintaining a de facto marital relationship with the father of the victim (the father of the victim also maintained a de facto marital relationship with the former wife). The Defendant and the J in the same year divorced from the former husband, and the Defendant are currently married with the former husband and the latter, and the latter are currently married with the former husband and the latter, and they are raising the latter husband and the latter. The Defendant has been raising the victim from around 2009.

② The Defendant came to know that he was the father of the victim’s kindergarten, and that he was the mother of the victim, and the husband and the outside person had her her friend and acted as her friend with the victim. However, in the situation where the Defendant and the victim group are established, the Defendant frequently used violence due to her friend and friance, which is difficult for the victim to cope with. In particular, the extent of the violence was more serious when the Defendant contests the issue of J and the victim.

③ Even in cases of assault revealed through the instant case, as stated in Section 1-A (A) of the crime committed at the time of the original trial, the body was fluorily cut to the telegraph, and the body was fluorily cut off, and the degree of violence was strong, and the degree of injury suffered was also serious. In addition, as a result of the body inspection of the victim’s body was found to have been discovered that there was a fiber and a partial chronic tyrosis of the body of the victim through a wide range of annual installments, and the Defendant’s violence appears to have been continuously exercised for a long time in light of the fact that the body was continuously at prices shown above.

(2) The intensity of the instant assault 1 and 2, and the bodily injury of the victim caused the assault.

① At the time of the death of the victim, the physical size of the victim was 123 cm, k 123 cm, and 20 km, and the Defendant was the body size of 166 cm and 58 km. As a result of the autopsy, the Defendant’s assault and assault in this case was observed at four government units of the victim, at one dub, one dub, one dub, one dub, and one dub on the right side of the two dubb, and one dub, one dub, one dub, which is less than dub, were 16 parts of the dub, which are the causes of the death.

② 피고인은 수사기관에서 이 사건 1차 폭행과 관련하여 일관되게, 피해자가 거짓말을 하여 화가 나 주먹으로 피해자의 머리를 몇 대 때리다가, 피해자가 이를 피하여 도망치자 피해자를 따라 가 발로 피해자의 몸통을 수 회 가격하였고, 이에 피해자가 무릎을 꿇고 앉아 잘못했다고 빌고, 피고인도 속상하여 같이 앉아 평평울다가 피해자가 피고인에게 다시는 거짓말을 하지 않겠다고 말하면서 다가오자, 피고인은 화가 덜 풀린 상태에서 주먹으로 피해자의 머리, 복부, 양쪽 허리 부분을 수차례더 때리다가 피해자에게 방으로 들어가라고 소리 질러 피해자로 하여금 방에 들어가게 했다』고 진술하고, 이 사건 2차 폭행과 관련하여, 『약 20분 정도 시간이 흐른 후 방에서 나온 피해자가 제대로 반성하지 않는다는 생각이 들어 다시 화가 나 주먹으로 피해자의 머리를 때리고 발로 옆구리, 배, 다리 등을 수회 차자, 피해자가 거실 바닥에 주저앉았고, 이때 피해자의 얼굴에 핏기가 없고 창백해보였으나, 피고인은 재차 주먹으로 피해자의 머리를 때리고 발로 피해자의 다리, 옆구리, 배 부분을 세게 수십 회 찼으며, 온 힘을 다해서 발로 찼고 무차별적으로 때렸다.고 진술하였는바, 피고인이 자신에게 유리하게 축소 진술하였을 가능성을 차치하고라도 그 진술내용 자체만으로도 그 폭행의 정도가 상상을 초월할 정도였음을 충분히 알 수 있다.

③ At the time of the instant case, there were 16 parts of the victim cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cage cages.

(3) Recognition of the victim’s status in the course of the instant assault

① 피고인이 피해자에게 주먹과 발로 약 35분간 무자비하게 이 사건 1차 폭행을 가한 이후 피해자가 자신의 방으로 돌아가 20 ~ 30분 정도 잠을 자고 나와 피고인에게 미안하다고 하며 소풍을 가고 싶다고 말했을 때 피해자의 얼굴에 핏기가 없고 창백해 보였다. 그럼에도 피고인은 피해자가 반성하지 않는다는 생각이 들어 다시 화가 나 주먹으로 피해자의 머리를 때리고 온힘을 다해 발로 옆구리, 배, 다리 등을 수회 차자, 피해자가 거실 바닥에 주저앉았다. 이때 피해자의 얼굴에 핏기가 없고 창백해보였으나, 피해자를 바로 앉힌 후 다시 온힘을 다해 주먹으로 피해자의 머리를 때리고 발로 피해자의 다리, 옆구리, 배 부분을 세게 수회 찼고 그 과정에서 피해자가 악악악 하는 비명을 질렀다』는 피고인의 일관된 진술에다가 앞서 본 부검결과 등에 따라 추정되는 폭행의 강도를 더하여 보면, 피고인이 인식한 '피해자가 비명을 지르며, 얼굴에 핏기가 없고 창백한 모습'은 피고인의 폭행으로 인해 피해자의 생명에 급박한 위험이 초래된 상황으로 봄이 상당하고(이와 같은 피해자의 안색에 관하여, 당심 증인 AM은, "갈비뼈가 부러져서 숨도 못 쉬고, 이로 인해 호흡운동도 안 되며, 그 다음에 폐가 손상되어 가스교환이 안 되어 산소량이 부족하고, 그 다음에 심장탐폰이 있으니까 피 방출량이 줄어들며, 그래서 '핏기가 없다'라고 했을 때 거의 죽어가고 있는 상황이라고 보인다"고 진술하고 있다), 또한 전문적인 의학지식이 없는 피고인이라고 하더라도 위와 같이 변화가 온 피해자의 모습을 지켜본 경우 피해자에 생명에 심각한 지장이 초래되었음을 충분히 인식한 것으로 볼 수 있다.

As such, even though the Defendant showed the form of the victim's death due to his own assault, the Defendant continued to commit assault against the victim, rather than the victim, and eventually, the Defendant seems to stop the assault.

② Although the Defendant did not use a deadly weapon or dangerous instrument when she assaults the victim, he/she does not use it to 7 years of age who was unable to fully develop the body, such as bones and finite body, it is nothing more than a deadly weapon of adult drinking or finite body, and the body part of the victim whose body body was concentratedly attacked by the Defendant is in an important organ of the human body where the victim’s body body body body body body body part, such as the body part of the victim’s body part where the victim’s body body body body part, which had been intensively attacked, is still in an important organ, and the body part of the victim’s body part where the body body part, such as the body body part and the heart, etc., has never been developed, can be sufficiently known that the intensive attack

③ In addition, the Defendant, who is more than three times the body of the victim, has a risk of 55 minutes of intensive pricing the side gate, which is capable of putting about 55 minutes off the victim’s body, to the extent that the Defendant had a very rough and interested situation at the time. However, according to the Defendant’s assertion, it appears that the Defendant had taken a provoking by stabilizing about 30 minutes between the first and the second assault in this case. However, even if the Defendant’s use of the second assault was more harsh than the face of the victim without the Defendant’s face, it is sufficiently recognized that the Defendant was aware or predicted that the result of the death of the victim in the course of the instant assault, and that the occurrence of the result was satisfly and it was sufficiently recognized that the Defendant accepted the occurrence of the result.

3. Judgment on the part of the request for attachment order

A. Summary of the claim

Since a person who has committed murder and has a risk of recommitting the murder crime, the defendant is requested to issue an order to attach a location tracking electronic device to the defendant pursuant to Article 5 (3) of the Act on Probation and Electronic Monitoring, etc. of Specific Criminal Offenders.

B. The judgment of the court below

The lower court dismissed the prosecutor’s request for the attachment order of this case on the ground that the Defendant was not guilty of murder.

C. The judgment of this Court

1) Relevant legal principles

The “risk of recommitting a homicide” under Article 5(3) of the Act on the Attachment, etc. of Electronic Monitoring, etc. of Specific Criminal Offenders (hereinafter “Act”) refers to a probable probability that the likelihood of recommitting a homicide is insufficient enough, and that the person subject to a request to attach an attachment order may decrison the legal peace by committing a homicide again in the future. The risk of recommitting a homicide is objectively determined by comprehensively assessing various circumstances, such as the occupation and environment of the person subject to a request to attach an attachment order, the conduct prior to the relevant crime, the motive, means, circumstances after the crime, and the situation after the crime, etc., and such determination shall be based on the time of the judgment, since it is a constructive judgment on the future (see Supreme Court Decision 2012Do2289, 2012Do525, May 10, 2012, 2012).

2) Specific determination

A) As seen earlier, it is recognized that the Defendant committed murder as stated in the following criminal facts.

However, in light of the following circumstances, it is difficult to view that there is a considerable probability that the Defendant would be able to escape legal peace by committing murder again in the future only with the above criminal facts and other evidence presented by the Prosecutor, in light of the aforementioned facts and the circumstances revealed by the evidence as seen earlier.

(1) The crime of murder of this case committed by the Defendant, while living together with the victim’s father and the victim, was committed by murdering the victim due to dolusence, and appears to have been committed on the basis of the specific relation between the Defendant and the victim. Although the Defendant denied the criminal intent, all of the facts of the other crimes are the time for the crime, and the victim’s life by taking advantage of the victim’s name uniforms.

(2) A defendant has no criminal records other than those prosecuted for a crime of fraud.

(3) As a result of the Ulsan Probation Office's investigation of the risk of recidivism against the Defendant, if based on the criteria of 'KORAS-G', it constitutes the intermediate level (7-11 points) with the total point of 8 points, and even if it is based on the criteria of 'PC-R', it is evaluated that the total point of 25 points is higher than the intermediate (7-24 points).

B) Therefore, the Defendant’s request for attachment order against the Defendant is without merit and must be dismissed pursuant to Article 9(4)1 of the Act. The judgment of the court below is with different reasons, but the conclusion is identical to that of the judgment of the court below. Therefore, the Prosecutor’s appeal for this part

4. Conclusion

A. Part of the defendant's case

The prosecutor’s appeal against the part of the judgment of the court below regarding the defendant’s case is with merit, and thus, one of the murder crimes and the remaining crimes among the judgment of the court below should be pronounced. Thus, without examining the Defendant and the prosecutor’s allegation of unfair sentencing regarding the part of the defendant’s case, the judgment of the court below is reversed under Article 364(6) of

B. Part of attachment order case

The prosecutor's appeal on the part of the judgment of the court below regarding the attachment order case shall be dismissed in accordance with Article 35 of the Act on the Electronic Monitoring, etc. of Specific Criminal Offenders and Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.

【Grounds for a new judgment concerning the part of the Defendant’s case】

Criminal facts and summary of evidence

The summary of the facts charged by this court and the evidence related thereto are as follows: "Paragraph 1-B" column of the judgment of the court below [crime 1-B] is as shown in Section 2-A, and "1-B" column of the judgment of the court below is as stated in Section 2-A, and "1-B" column of the judgment of the court below is as stated in Section 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act, except for adding "1. The defendant's legal statement to the defendant's partial court of the court of the court below and the original court of the court of the first instance" as well as "1. witnessM's legal statement" in addition

Application of Statutes

1. Article relevant to the facts constituting an offense and the selection of punishment;

Article 250(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of homicide, the choice of limited imprisonment), Article 257(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of inflicting bodily injury, each choice of imprisonment), Article 329 (the point of larceny and the choice of imprisonment)

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

The former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act (Concurrent Crimes of homicide with the largest punishment)

Reasons for sentencing

1. The scope of applicable sentences by law: Imprisonment for not less than five years nor more than 45 years; and

2. The scope of revised recommendations: Imprisonment with prison labor for up to 10 years up to June 18.

(a) First crime (Crime of Murder);

[Determination of Punishment] homicide, Type 2 (Ordinary homicide)

[Special Aggravationd Persons] Aggravated Punishments: A mitigations of Victims vulnerable to crimes: A murder by willful negligence.

【Determination of Recommendation Area】 Basic Area

[Scope of Recommendation] Imprisonment of 10 years to 16 years

(b) Crimes under subparagraphs 2 and 3 (the crimes of injury under paragraphs (1) (2) and (3) at the time of original adjudication).

[Determination of Type] General Bodily Injury

[Special Aggravation] Aggravations: serious injury, cruel method of crime, victim vulnerable to crime.

【Determination of Recommendation Area】 Special Priority Area

[Scope of Recommendation] Six months to three years of imprisonment

C. The final scope of sentence

The result of the aggravation of multiple crimes (the upper limit of crime 1 + the upper limit of crime 2 + the upper limit of crime 1/2 + 1/3 of the upper limit of crime : Imprisonment with prison labor for 10 years to June 18.

3. Determination of sentence of imprisonment (18 years of imprisonment).

Although the Defendant was not a friendship of the victim, the Defendant was faced with the care of the victim while living together with the victim, and accordingly, was responsible for protecting the victim’s body and emotional sentiments and raising healthy mind. Nevertheless, the Defendant: (a) forced the victim to take an abnormal standard that does not fit the victim’s age compared with the victim’s age; (b) on the other hand, the victim expressed extreme decentralization, and embling verbal abuse and assault, and abused the victim. The degree of the abuse was only charged with the Defendant’s act of purchasing the victim’s body and emotionally, such as the son’s finger, and the son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son.

The Defendant, as a kind of friend, committed both acts to look at the victim’s surrounding persons by individually and severally. However, when there is a friendal distance with the Defendant, the Defendant showed double appearance, such as her cruel assault, even if there is a sofrisome distance, and was the purpose of punishing the victim. On the other hand, the victim was dependent on the Defendant after her friend and her frienda. On the other hand, the victim followed the Defendant as her frienda when she depended on the Defendant when 3 years of age. In recent years of age, under the circumstances where frienda cannot be seen as frequently due to the Defendant’s continuous assault and abuse, even though her frienda was committed, the Defendant did not request any help to the surrounding persons, such as frienda and frienda, and rather, he did not fit the Defendant’s friend and friendathatha, and had been friing the Defendant’s life.

Ultimately, the Defendant’s crime of injury and murder of this case can only be deemed to have been committed in the course of assaulting the victim continuously at his wife, such as the relationship between her father and her mother, and the relationship between her father and her father, who is a person living together with her wife, by continuously displaying and resolving stress and brut. The brutly victim did not bring about cruel money on the brue of the victim on two occasions on the ground that she did not bring about a brut violence for about one hour since she did not go against her mother and frut, which led to the reduction of the life of the victim by her own frut violence, such as drinking and frut violence. Furthermore, the Defendant’s life and frutencing from the victim’s fludial body cannot be altered due to his or her flutness, rather than by his or her fludial body, and the victim’s flut will have been seriously affected by the victim’s flut.

However, there is no evidence to deem that the Defendant had planned murder with the purpose of murdering the victim from the beginning; the Defendant is a woman under 41 years of age who is prosecuted for fraud; there is no other criminal power except for the charge of fraud; the Defendant has been compensated for the damage of the larceny of this case; and the Defendant has been able to peep into the situation of a serious change, such as his own responsibility and reflects on the result of the death of the victim while living in custody.

As can be seen, various circumstances, i.e., the gravity of legal interest infringed by the instant crime, the severity of motive, the process of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc. to strengthen the punishment for the crime of child abuse, and the purpose of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Child Abuse Crimes newly enforced from September 29, 2014 to strengthen the punishment for the crime of child abuse, and child abuse crimes are committed against a child whose guardian’s ability to exercise his/her responsibility and defense is limited to physical, mental, and sexual violence, which may impede the normal development of the child, and thus, are deemed to have sufficiently formed a national consensus that it is necessary to punish the defendant, regardless of the circumstances favorable to the defendant as seen earlier. In full view of the fact that, as such, the crime of child abuse is committed against a child who is under his/her care and lacks the ability to defend the child, it is inevitable to punish the defendant with strict punishment corresponding to the punishment for the crime, regardless of the circumstances favorable to the defendant.

The presiding judge, the number of judges;

Applicable Mutatis Mutandis to judge gambling

Judges Anti-Jin-dong

1) The “case” column of the lower judgment is missing the case number of the lower court’s attachment order column.