logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2014.02.20 2013노4163
특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(절도)등
Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant

A Imprisonment with prison labor for two years and for one year and six months, respectively.

(b).

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Error of facts (Defendant B) recognized the fact that Defendant A purchased stolen goods No. 1 in the year No. 2 of the crime log II in the facts charged in the instant case and a mobile phone No. 1 on July 2, 2013, but it did not acquire stolen goods No. 2 through No. 15 of the sight table. However, Defendant B merely received remuneration under the pretext of delivery after transporting stolen goods purchased by the CA.

B. (1) The lower court’s sentence (2 years of imprisonment, Defendant B: imprisonment with prison labor for one year and six months, confiscation, and return) is too unreasonable.

(2) The lower court’s sentence against Defendant A of the Prosecutor is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. We examine ex officio the Defendants’ grounds for appeal prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal.

A. In the trial court, the prosecutor filed an application for changes in the indictment with respect to the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (thief) of Defendant A, and this court permitted the same and changed the subject of the trial against Defendant A. As such, the part of the judgment of the court below against Defendant A cannot be maintained any more.

B. Confiscation is not limited to the goods provided or intended to be provided to a person other than the criminal, or those acquired by a person other than the criminal knowing the fact after the crime is committed. In this case, "goods provided to the criminal act" is not limited to the goods used for the criminal act itself, and even if they are used for the act before the commencement of the act or after the completion of the act, they shall be included in the goods provided under the above law.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2006Do4075 delivered on September 14, 2006). The evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below is confiscated.

arrow