Cases of wrong recognition of deadly weapons under Article 7 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act;

The mere possession of knife can not be recognized as carrying a deadly weapon that is likely to be used for an offense provided for in Article 7 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act.

Article 7 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act

Defendant

Jeonju District Court Decision 77No389 delivered on September 1, 1977

The original judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Jeonju District Court Panel Division.

The defendant's grounds of appeal are examined.

According to the judgment below, the court below

1. From January 10:00 to January 17:00 of the same year from January 14.13:00 of the same year to 23:00 of the same year, the Defendant habitually embling by using a paint from January 15 of the same year to January 16, 21:30 of the following day.

2. On January 12, 197, from around 19:00 to around 16.10:00 of the same month, the Defendant carried with him a knife knife, which is a deadly weapon that could be used for committing the crime, at the 208 knife room, etc. located in Jeonju-si, and the Defendant dismissed the Defendant’s appeal by maintaining the judgment of the first instance court that determined that the above act was against Article 7 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, and that the above act was dismissed.

However, habitual gambling can be recognized in cases where an actor has a habit of engaging in ordinary gambling and gambling is conducted as a result of the habition of the habition. Thus, this case gambling cannot be deemed as habitual gambling of the defendant, which is approved by the first instance court's decision, even though it does not constitute habitual gambling of the defendant, the measures recognized as habitually by the court below are erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles of habitual gambling.

Next, Article 7 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act provides that a person who carries a deadly weapon or other dangerous object which is likely to be used in a crime under this Act without any justifiable reason shall be punished. The first instance court and the lower court cannot find it in the record, based on evidence, on which evidence the Defendant recognized as a deadly weapon that is likely to be used for a crime under the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, and the lower court did not err by misapprehending the judgment that if a person carries a knife with any other knife, it would have been likely to be used for a crime under the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, or by recognizing the facts without any evidence.

Therefore, all arguments are reasonable, and they are reversed and remanded with the assent of all participating judges. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices Yang Byung-ho (Presiding Judge)