logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2014.10.02 2014노2181
야간방실침입절도등
Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

The seized evidence Nos. 1 and 2 shall be returned to the victim C.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. At the time of the instant crime, the Defendant was in a state of mental disability due to low recognition capacity.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (ten months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the result of the sentencing investigation in the judgment of the court on the claim of mental retardation, it is recognized that the defendant's cognitive ability is lower than normal conditions, but it seems that the defendant lacks the ability to discern things or make decisions. Thus, the defendant's claim of mental retardation is rejected.

B. The Defendant’s judgment on the assertion of unfair sentencing is likely to repeat the crime of this case even though having been sentenced several times due to the same theft crimes, and thus, it is inevitable to sentence a sentence to the Defendant prior to the crime of recidivism.

However, in full view of the following circumstances that are recognized as the result of the sentencing review, including the investigation of sentencing in the trial at the court, i.e., the defendant has been detained for not less than five months in the instant case, and the defendant has a profound growth environment, such as his old age and growth in the OO welfare center. Each of the instant crimes is committed by the defendant while living in his house, and the amount of damage is not large, and some attempted crimes are committed, and the recognition ability of the defendant is considerably lowered compared to normal crimes, and other various circumstances that are the conditions of the sentencing specified in the instant case, including the motive and background leading up to the instant crime, the age, character and conduct of the defendant, and the environment, etc., the sentencing of the court below seems to be somewhat inappropriate.

3. As such, the defendant's argument of mental disability is without merit, but the argument of unfair sentencing is with merit, so the judgment of the court below is reversed under Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the argument is

Criminal facts

(b).

arrow