logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산고등법원 2018.09.06 2018노403
살인미수
Text

All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant (four years of imprisonment, etc.) is too unreasonable.

B. The above sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below on the defendant is too unhued and unfair.

2. The crime of this case committed by the defendant's wife is attempted to murder the sniff in the road while the victim discovered and threatened the victim who was the victim of domestic violence.

The victim suffered an injury in need of 6 weeks' medical treatment at the left-hand chest, and the victim suffered an injury at the center of the crime.

The defendant's crime of this case is very heavy in that the victim could lose his valuable life.

On March 2, 2011, the Defendant continuously exercised violence against the victim on the grounds that the victim was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for one year in Busan District Court on the ground that the victim was able to get the victim's head into another day and got two parts of the victim's head into another day.

The physical or mental pain suffered by the victim from the defendant does not go against the defendant, and the defendant has committed the crime of attempted murder with the excessive road at this time.

In addition, if the defendant had a knife and was sentenced to eight months of imprisonment with prison labor due to a crime threatening neighbors, etc., and three months of imprisonment with prison labor, again committed the crime of this case, and considering that the defendant had a number of criminal records of the same kind of violence, it is necessary to severely punish the defendant.

However, the Supreme Court’s sentencing committee, including the fact that the injured party is taking a prior action against the accused, that the accused acknowledges his mistake and that there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and that where the first instance sentencing does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it. In addition, all other conditions of sentencing indicated in the records of this case, such as age, sex, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, etc.

arrow