2012 Synthetic209 homicide

A

Yellow acceptance (prosecution), and trial;

Law Firm B, Attorney C, D

November 8, 2012

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for fifteen years.

Criminal facts

The Defendant, at around 00:50 on May 31, 2012, had the victim drinked in the middle school E (ma, South and 42 years of age) and E (ma), who had been living in the same area as that of a middle school, had the victim ignored and her trees continuously, and had the victim do so, and had the victim die at low blood shocks from the right side and the left side spbucked in the front side of the said main entrance in order to make a knife telephone communications. On May 31, 2012, the Defendant killed the victim with the knifbbbbbbs and the clothes, one time, and caused the victim to die by a shock shock in the front side of the said main entrance and the left side spack.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of the witness H;

1. Each police protocol of statement against I, J, K, L, and M;

1. Judgment on the assertion of the Defendant and the defense counsel regarding the autopsy report, major autopsy records, autopsy records, autopsy records, and autopsy appraisal records

1. The assertion;

Although the defendant knife the victim two times, it was true that the victim was knife at the time and had the same attitude that the defendant would inflict harm on the defendant and his/her family, and the defendant was frightened by the victim and was frightened by the victim to escape from the victim, and there was no intention to kill the victim.

2. Determination

In the event that the Defendant did not have the intent to commit murder at the time of committing the crime, and only there was only the intent to commit an injury or assault, whether or not the Defendant had the intent to commit the crime at the time of committing the crime ought to be determined by comprehensively taking account of the objective circumstances before and after committing the crime, such as the background leading up to the crime, motive for committing the crime, the type of used weapon prepared, the injury and repetition of the attack, the likelihood of the occurrence of the consequence of the death, etc.

In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by evidence, ① the Defendant returned home after drinking alcohol, and fast and committed a crime by finding the victim. At the time, it is difficult for the victim to believe that he knife knife knife and knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife, knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knif.

Application of Statutes

Article 250(1) of the Criminal Act (Appointment of Imprisonment for Imprisonment)

The reason for sentencing is that a person’s life has absolute character and dignity which cannot be disposed of without permission, and that person’s life can not be recovered once. The Defendant’s crime of this case resulted in serious consequences that fit the victim’s death, and the victim’s bereaved family members were also suffering from a life-free cleaning pain. Moreover, no particular circumstance is revealed that the Defendant is making efforts to compensate the victim’s bereaved family members for damage or take a scam. Furthermore, the sentencing guidelines established in relation to the crime of murder of this case are more than 9 years and less than 13 years, and the sentencing guidelines established in relation to the crime of this case’s murder is more than 12 years and less than 17 years. Despite the Defendant’s assertion, in light of the objective circumstances revealed by evidence, it does not appear that the Defendant merely murdered the victim without permission by merely scambling the victim under the influence of alcohol. Moreover, it would normally be difficult to propose that the Defendant’s life deduction of the victim would justify the crime, but it would be difficult to say that the Defendant’s basic motive and the motive of this case should be presented.

In full view of the above circumstances, considering the fact that the defendant was living without any previous conviction except several times of fine since 1997, the result of the victim's death is against the mistake, and other circumstances favorable to the defendant, a long-term sentence equivalent to its liability is inevitable, and thus, the sentence is determined as above.

The judge of the presiding judge;

Judge Cho Jong-jin

Judges Kang Jin-jin