(영문) 광주고등법원 2018.01.18 2017노457 | 리걸엔진

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 광주고등법원 2018.01.18 2017노457

살인등

Text

Defendant

In addition, all appeals filed by the respondent for attachment order and the prosecutor are dismissed.

Reasons

1. There is no change in the sentencing conditions compared to the lower court’s judgment as to both parties’ unfair argument of sentencing, and where the lower court’s sentencing does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it should be respected (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The grounds for sentencing alleged by the Defendant and the requester for an attachment order (hereinafter “Defendant”) and the prosecutor in this court are deemed to have been sufficiently taken into account in determining the sentence, and there is no change in the sentencing conditions compared to the lower court’s new sentencing data, since there was no change in the sentencing conditions.

B. In full view of all sentencing factors indicated in the pleadings of this case, including the Defendant’s age, criminal record, sex and environment, motive and background of the crime, means and method of the crime, circumstances after the crime, etc., as well as the Defendant’s age, criminal records, sexual conduct, and environment, the motive and circumstance of the crime, the method and method of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentence of the court below cannot be deemed to be excessively heavy or unobcied so far as it goes beyond the reasonable scope of discretion.

The Defendant and the prosecutor’s assertion disputing the propriety of sentencing in the lower court are not accepted.

2. As long as the Defendant and the prosecutor appealed on the part regarding the case for which the request for attachment order was filed, the appeal shall be deemed to have been filed regarding the case for which the request for attachment order was filed pursuant to Article 9(8) of the Act on the Protection and Observation of Specific Criminal Offenders and the Electronic Monitoring, Etc.

However, the defendant and the prosecutor did not submit the grounds for appeal regarding the application for attachment order, and there is no ground for reversal ex officio as to this part.

3. Conclusion

참조조문

-전자장치 부착 등에 관한 법률 제9조 제8항

참조판례

-대법원 2015. 7. 23. 선고 2015도3260 전원합의체 판결

유사 판례

-광주고등법원 2020.02.20 2019노382

-광주고등법원 2017.12.07 2017노372

-수원고등법원 2019.08.22 2019노107

-광주고등법원 2020.07.23 2020노107

-광주고등법원 2020.10.15 2020노256