Details of the crime of attempted robbery and injury;

In order to have an attempted robbery committed an assault for the purpose of taking another's property by force, but did not reach the degree of injury, so long as the injury was inflicted on another for the purpose of forcibly taking the part of the injury, the elements of the injury by robbery, which was not taken by force, shall be deemed to have been satisfied.

Articles 342 and 337 of the Criminal Act

Defendant

Seoul Criminal Court of the first instance (64Da13193)

We reverse the original judgment.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than three years and six months.

The summary of the grounds for appeal by the defendant in this case shall:

The court below recognized a mistake of the fact that not only committed an illegal act that affected the judgment, but also the amount of the punishment is too unreasonable.

Therefore, in light of the records, if the court below reviewed the evidence duly examined, there is no intention to find out there is any evidence to believe that the court below found a false fact as the theory of lawsuit, and thus, it cannot be accepted as there is no reason to find the wrong fact. Then, considering the method, result, etc. of the law of this case, which can be recognized through a single record, the court below's sentencing against the defendant is appropriate, and there is no reason to find any other reason to treat the defendant more less somewhat. Thus, the issue is also without merit.

However, in the judgment of the court below ex officio, the court below, however, states that the defendant's act of cutting the victim into a 18 centmera and snick 10 centmera with a length of 18 centmera in order to force the victim's own saves, led the victim to the left-hand tamper, which requires about 5 days of saves of saves, but the victim's act is "the robbery" and the victim's act was not achieved, so it is obvious in the original trial that the defendant was committed as an attempted robbery of robbery in the application of the law.

In order to constitute the crime of attempted robbery under Articles 337, 333, and 342 of the Criminal Act, the crime of robbery was committed with the purpose of taking the other's property by force. However, it is necessary to say that there was an assault for the purpose of taking the other's property, but it did not reach the injury to the other for the purpose of taking by force, so long as the perpetrator inflicted an injury on the other for the purpose of taking by force, the crime of robbery was not taken by force, and the element of the crime of robbery is deemed to have been satisfied. However, according to the facts established by the court below as mentioned above, according to the facts in this case, the crime of robbery of this case must be deemed to have satisfied the element of the crime of robbery. However, even though the court below's judgment that the defendant failed to achieve the purpose of robbery, which was "the robbery" of the victim, did not meet the purpose of robbery, and thus, it is difficult to say that the defendant did not have any reason or committed any unlawful act inconsistent with the reason.

After all, the judgment of the court below should be reversed in this regard, so this paper decides to reverse the judgment of the court below in accordance with Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is again decided as follows after pleading.

Criminal facts

On August 19, 1964, at least 12:00, the Defendant decided to forcibly take a bicycle on the national highway of Seongdong-gu Seoul, Seongdong-gu, Seoul, from the victim non-indicted 1 (the victim non-indicted 1 (the victim between 40 and 40 years old), who was in the middle of the 300-meter away from the east of the east of the east where he had no intention to sell it to the dong, and let the dong to the south of the east of the 300-meter away from the east of the east of the east-gu, Seoul, and then let the son prepare in advance at the end of the 18 cent square meters long, the flap 10% long, and the flap fel fel, which is the very left head of the son of the dong-gu, but the dong "Robbery flafing flaf" and caused the son to reflect the left side of the east for five days.

Evidence

The remainder of the facts except the degree of injury inflicted upon the victim non-indicted 1,

1. The statement made by the defendant in accordance with the facts stated in the trial process; and

1. The description of the statement in accordance with the reasoning in the original trial process by the defendant

1. The part of the statement consistent with the facts in the judgment of the court below rendered by the witness non-indicted 1.

1. Each statement of the suspect's personal records against the defendant prepared by the prosecutor, which corresponds to the facts of the judgment.

1. Recognizing the fact that seized pine mons were existing in one (No. 1) and the victim Nonindicted Party 1’s injury is part of the victim Nonindicted Party 1’s injury can be recognized by the diagnosis report consistent with the facts in the judgment, among the diagnosis documents prepared by Nonindicted Party 2. The facts in the judgment are sufficient.

Legal Application

In light of the law, the so-called "public health unit defendant's decision" constitutes Article 337 of the Criminal Act, and therefore, it is recognized that there are reasonable grounds to choose a prescribed life sentence during the prescribed period of punishment and that there is a reason to take into account in the circumstances of the crime. Thus, the defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor and three years and six months within the scope of the mitigated term of punishment pursuant to Article 53 and Article 55 (1) and (3) of the same Act, and one hundred and twenty days out of the number of days of detention before the sentence of the

It is so decided as per Disposition with the above reasons.

Judges Jeong Tae-won (Presiding Judge)