본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
부산지방법원 2017.06.30 2016노5001

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Acquittal of the accused shall be acquitted.


1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) of the lower court’s punishment (amounting to two million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Examination ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant.

Where several acts falling under the name of the same crime continue to be committed for a certain period under the single and continuous criminal intent and the benefit and protection of the law from such acts are the same, each of them shall be punished by a single comprehensive crime (see Supreme Court Decision 2007Do595, Mar. 29, 2007). Where a judgment becomes final and conclusive with respect to a part of a crime in the relation of a single comprehensive crime, the judgment of the court of fact-finding shall be sentenced to acquittal after the res judicata effect of the final and conclusive judgment has yet to be invalidated (see Supreme Court Decision 2006Do1252, May 11, 2006). According to the records, the defendant shall be found to have received from January 1, 201 to October 19, 201, the fact that the defendant was convicted of a fine of Busan District Court Decision 200,000 won (No. 36, May 26, 2016).

The facts charged in this case argues that the Defendant engaged in the sales business of unreported livestock products in the Geum-gu Busan Metropolitan Government (the Defendant’s residence) around July 28, 2016, and that it is reasonable to view that the Defendant engaged in the same or similar criminal acts under the single and continuous criminal intent, on the same basis as the facts charged in the previous case and the place where the judgment became final and conclusive (the Defendant’s business was conducted in his/her residence), and the damaged legal interests, etc. (the prosecutor asserts to the effect that the Defendant had renewed the criminal intent by suspending his/her business after the previous judgment).

Based on the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the court below.