(영문) 서울고등법원 2018.05.10 2017노3414 | 리걸엔진

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울고등법원 2018.05.10 2017노3414

현주건조물방화미수등

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

Summary of Reasons for appeal

A. The direct evidence that could acknowledge the attempt to commit the crime of fire to the present main building is that “the defendant appeared to have shot up twice from the kitchen window on the side of the kitchen by attaching a swelve with a swelve,” is the only statement of I, and in light of the structure of the building, etc., he cannot witness the behavior that the defendant attached to the fire, and thus, I’s statement is not reliable.

Defendant

As alleged, the possibility that a cigarette can be smoked may not be ruled out that a cigarette can be smoked or a cigarette can be stored far from a newspaper.

2) Even if the defendant was placed in a newspaper, the quantity and nature of the newspaper, which is a intermediary, may continue to effect burning in the defendant's residence, taking into account the nature of the newspaper.

It is difficult to see that there is commencement of the crime of fire prevention.

shall not be deemed to exist.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (the 4 years of suspended sentence in December and June, 200, and the 2 years of probation observation) is too unreasonable.

Judgment

A. As to the assertion of misunderstanding the facts about the current state building fire prevention and the assertion of misunderstanding the legal principles, the Defendant alleged that this part of the facts was identical to the assertion of misunderstanding, and the lower court, based on the evidence duly admitted and investigated, found the following circumstances: (i) the Defendant: (ii) the Defendant, upon receiving a report from a neighboring resident, did the lessor act as to his residence; (iii) the police officer G and H, who was called for the first time upon receiving a report from the neighboring resident, did not directly witness the fire; (iv) the Defendant sent to the effect that the Defendant, upon receiving a request for assistance, sent to the effect that the Defendant, sent a large number of shots, shots to enter the place of residence; (iii) the police officer, upon receiving a request for assistance, sent up two times from the kitchen on the side of the kitchen.

4. K of fire officers called out after receiving a report 119.

유사 판례

-의정부지방법원 2021.01.15 2020고합289

-대구지방법원 2016.09.23 2016고합320

-서울남부지방법원 2017.02.10 2017고합7

-의정부지방법원 고양지원 2018.09.18 2018고합168

-대전지방법원 천안지원 2016.06.15 2016고합47