logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 1986. 8. 19. 선고 86도960 판결
[폭력행위등처벌에관한법률위반][공1986.10.1.(785),1263]
Main Issues

Whether moscoo used in transporting rice coos, etc. falls under the dangerous articles under Article 3 (1) of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act.

Summary of Judgment

Accushion used in transporting rice, accushion, etc. is likely to harm people in light of their shapes and uses, which could lead to the risk of causing harm to the other party. Thus, this constitutes dangerous objects as provided in Article 3(1) of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act.

[Reference Provisions]

Article 3(1) of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act

Escopics

Defendant

upper and high-ranking persons

Defendant

Defense Counsel

Attorney Lee Han-hoon

Judgment of the lower court

Seoul Criminal Court Decision 86No1049 delivered on April 10, 1986

Text

The appeal is dismissed.

75 days of detention after an appeal shall be included in the original sentence.

Reasons

The grounds of appeal by the defendant and the public defender are also examined.

According to the evidence adopted by the court of first instance by the court below, it is not difficult to acknowledge the criminal facts of the defendant as to the judgment, and it does not seem that the defendant was in a state of mental disorder under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing the crime, and it can be acknowledged that the defendant could harm a person in light of its shape and purpose, and if using this, the other party could cause danger. Thus, the court below is justified in holding that it is a dangerous object as provided by Article 3 (1) of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act. Ultimately, the court below did not err by misunderstanding the rules of evidence, such as the theory of lawsuit, nor by the application of the law. As to the judgment sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for 1 and 6 months, as in this case, there is no legitimate ground for appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing under the Criminal Procedure Act. We cannot

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and part of the detention days after the appeal is included in the original sentence. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices Choi Jae-ho (Presiding Justice)

arrow