logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2017.04.20 2016노2297
절도
Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The sentence of sentence shall be suspended for the defendant.

Reasons

The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendant, who has been mentally and physically weak due to the division of a mental disease, shows symptoms such as the decline in the ability to determine the reality, impulse, network, and social degradation, committed the instant crime in a state of mental and physical weakness due to such mental division.

The sentencing of the court below's improper sentencing (the sentencing of 300,000 won) is too unreasonable.

Judgment

First, in full view of the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the court below as to the Defendant’s assertion of mental and physical weakness, the Defendant had weak ability to discern things or make decisions due to mental division at the time of committing the instant crime.

Since it is reasonable to see that the defendant's mental and physical weakness is reasonable.

(1) The Defendant began to undergo mental treatment because he/she was absent from the time he/she was walking to a middle school and was unable to attend the school due to his/her uneasiness and uneasiness.

Since then, the defendant has repeatedly been hospitalized and discharged in H hospital and I mental medical clinic several times and continued to receive outpatient treatment.

② On March 10, 2009, the Defendant was registered with Grade II mental disorders.

③ From September 19, 2016 to September 19, 2016, the Defendant was hospitalized in the Do I Medical Center. The medical doctor J of the above hospital shows symptoms, such as the decline in the ability to determine reality, impulses, inferior hygiene management, net conditions, and social decline, and the perception of his/her illness is depreciated.

“.....”

④ Employees D, who worked in food stores as stated in the facts of the crime in the original judgment, stated in the investigative agency that “the police officer: (a) had the defect reported to the police again return to store goods; and (b) had another flag with another flag; and (c) had another flag with another flag with another flag with another flag with another flag; and (d) dispatched the police

arrow