logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 2013.09.13 2013도6121
재물손괴등
Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to Busan District Court Panel Division.

Reasons

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. According to the provisions of Articles 361-3 and 364 of the Criminal Procedure Act, the appellate court’s structure is to be tried by the appellate court on the grounds of appeal filed by the defendant or his/her defense counsel within the statutory period, and even if the appellate brief has already been filed, the grounds for appeal may be added, changed, and withdrawn. Thus, the appellate court cannot decide on the appellate

(2) According to the records on June 25, 2004 (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2004Do2611, Jan. 25, 2007; 2006Do8591, Jan. 25, 2007; 2008Do11213, Apr. 9, 2009). 2. The records reveals: (i) the court below appointed M& attorney as a defendant’s public defender on April 22, 2013; (ii) the defendant was served with a certified copy of the judgment; (iii) the decision to appoint a public defender; and (iii) the public defender was served with a notice of the decision to appoint a public defender and the court date of trial on the same day; and (iii) the public defender filed the statement of grounds of appeal on April 24, 2013; and (iii) the court below closed the pleadings on the first day; and

3. The fact that a judgment dismissing the appeal of the defendant is pronounced, opening the second court date at 9:50;

Therefore, although the deadline for submission of the grounds for appeal by the defendant and his defense counsel is until May 13, 2013, the court below completed the appellate court's judgment by rendering a judgment dismissing the defendant's appeal on May 3, 2013, before the deadline for submission of the grounds for appeal filed by the defense counsel on April 26, 2013, even though the deadline for submission of the grounds for appeal by the defendant and his defense counsel is to be until May 13, 2013, the court below decided to dismiss the defendant's appeal by not later than the deadline for submission of the grounds for appeal by the defendant and

3. Therefore, the judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded.

arrow