logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 1986. 7. 12.자 86모24 결정
[상고기각결정에대한재항고][공1986.9.1.(783),1071]
Main Issues

Part of appeal by the defense counsel after the defendant's right to appeal has expired.

Summary of Decision

A person who has waived an appeal may not re-appeal the case in accordance with Article 354 of the Criminal Procedure Act, and after the right of appeal of the defendant has been extinguished, a defense counsel may not make an appeal.

[Reference Provisions]

Articles 376(1), 354, and 341 of the Criminal Procedure Act

Reference Cases

Supreme Court Order 83Mo41 Decided August 31, 1983

Re-appellant

Re-appellant

Defense Counsel

Attorney Lee Jae-il

United States of America

Seoul Criminal Court Order 86No2139 dated June 7, 1986

Text

The reappeal is dismissed.

Reasons

The grounds for appeal stated in a written appeal shall be deemed to have been filed.

A person who has waived an appeal cannot re-appeal the case pursuant to Article 354 of the Criminal Procedure Act, and a defense counsel cannot appeal the case after the defendant's right to appeal has expired. In this case, the defendant renounced his right to appeal after the judgment of the appellate court was rendered, and thereafter his defense counsel withdraws the defendant's expression of intent to waive the appeal, and the court below is justified to dismiss the appeal in accordance with Article 376 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, deeming that this appeal was filed after the expiration of the right to appeal. The theory of lawsuit is without meriting the order of the court below on its own opinion.

Therefore, the reappeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Park Jong-soo (Presiding Justice)

arrow