logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 2013.10.02 2013노1022
절도등
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The lower court convicted the Defendant of the facts charged in this case on the ground that the gene extracted from beer cans found at the site of mistake of facts (hereinafter “the instant beer cans”) and the Defendant’s request for appraisal (as evidence Nos. 6 through 8, hereinafter “the instant request for appraisal”) are identical to that of the Defendant’s genes.

However, in light of the following circumstances: ① the victim’s statement on the location where the beer cans of this case are found is not consistent; ② the police officer’s statement on the location where beer cans of this case found also differs from the victim’s statement; ③ the “report on the Measures against thiefs” or “report on the Measures against thiefs of this case” is not mentioned on the beer cans of this case, there is strong doubt as to whether the beer cans of this case at the site.

Therefore, the written request for appraisal of this case cannot be a evidence of guilt, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge the facts charged of this case.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below which pronounced guilty against the defendant is erroneous by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the judgment.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of mistake of facts, the court below's determination on the defendant's and defense counsel's assertion is a reliable evidence of the facts charged of this case in light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the court below after considering the circumstances presented in the "judgment on the defendant's and defense counsel's assertion" and the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, and it does not seem that there was an error of law by misunderstanding the facts of the court below which convicted the defendant

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

(1) The Kim Jong-dae police station that was dispatched to the site immediately after the occurrence of the instant case.

arrow