Whether the act of aiding and abetting the escape of an offender after the time of the escape and the act of aiding and abetting the escape of the offender constitutes a crime of aiding and abetting the escape (negative)

The crime of escape is committed immediately when the criminal has escaped from the actual control of the person who committed the crime of escape. The crime of aiding and abetting the escape is committed independently. Since the crime of aiding and abetting the escape is committed independently by the act of accomplice, such as causing or facilitating the escape of the criminal in the crime of aiding and abetting the escape, the act of aiding and abetting and abetting the escape of the criminal may constitute the crime of aiding and abetting the escape of the criminal after the escape is committed.

Articles 145(1) and 147 of the Criminal Act

Defendant

Prosecutor

Seoul Criminal Court Decision 91No129 delivered on May 10, 1991

The appeal is dismissed.

We examine the prosecutor's grounds of appeal.

The crime of escape is committed immediately when the criminal has escaped from the actual control of the person who committed the crime of escape. The crime of aiding and abetting the escape is committed independently. Since the crime of aiding and abetting the escape is committed independently by the act of accomplice, such as causing or facilitating the escape of the criminal in the crime of aiding and abetting the escape, the act of aiding and abetting and abetting the escape of the criminal after the escape of the criminal constitutes the crime of aiding and abetting the escape of the criminal.

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below held that the defendant's act of this case, which caused the non-indicted to deliver a car owned by the non-indicted in his possession to the non-indicted so that the non-indicted who succeeded in the escape from the confinement facility can escape to Seoul at a distance of time after the defendant's act of escape was completed, is not an act after the non-indicted's criminal act of escape was completed. The judgment of the court below is just in light of the above legal principles, and there is no error of law such as misapprehension of legal principles as pointed out in the lawsuit. The argument is without merit.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Park Jong-ho (Presiding Justice)