(영문) 서울고등법원 2015.01.30 2014노2431 | 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 2015.01.30 2014노2431

살인

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four years.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant, as an unmarried mother, argued a misunderstanding of facts and a misapprehension of legal principles, committed an act of assaulting a victim by failing to participate in the netization because the victim did not sound, and committed an act of assaulting the victim at the time, not using a deadly weapon or other things, and committed an act of assaulting the part of the ship four times, and the result of death was not anticipated. As such, the Defendant cannot be deemed to have had the intention of murder, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the charge of murder, in so doing, erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine as to the intention of murder, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine as to the intention of murder.

B. The Defendant’s assertion of mental or physical disability has serious symptoms of depression and depression, and this led to the instant crime because it was impossible to control or control the appraisal, thereby leading to the instant crime. As such, at the time, the Defendant was in a state of lacking the ability to discern things or make decisions.

C. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant (ten years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Ex officio determination (Changes in Indictment) ex officio, the prosecutor, while maintaining the facts charged for murder in the trial as follows, applied for amendments to the indictment with the contents that add the facts charged for the death resulting from bodily injury as a preliminary measure. Since the subject of the trial was changed by this court, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained as it is.

However, despite the above reasons for reversal of authority, the argument of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles as to the primary facts charged, and the argument of mental suffering from mental suffering is still subject to the judgment of this court, and this is examined.

On March 24, 2014, the Defendant was playing in the house room of the Defendant No. 902, Namyang-si around 11:00 on March 24, 201.

유사 판례

-광주고등법원 2015.09.17 2015노308

-서울고등법원 2015.08.21 2015노1014

-서울고등법원 2020.01.10 2019노2153

-대전고등법원 2020.10.16 2020노214

-서울고등법원 2015.08.13 2015노1104