beta
Main Issues
The competent court for an objection against the execution of a criminal trial
Summary of Judgment
The competent court of the objection against the execution of the judgment as stipulated in Article 489 of the Criminal Procedure Act is the court which sentenced the judgment, and the court which sentenced the judgment here refers to the court which sentenced the defendant to the punishment, and the court which dismissed the appeal against the judgment sentenced to the punishment.
[Reference Provisions]
Article 489 of the Criminal Procedure Act
Reference Cases
Supreme Court Order 69 seconds65 Dated January 9, 1970 Dated June 7, 1962
New Secretary-General
Applicant
Text
The objection shall be dismissed.
Reasons
We examine ex officio the legitimacy of the objection of this case.
Article 489 of the Criminal Procedure Act provides that the court which has sentenced the judgment is the court which has sentenced the judgment, and the court which has sentenced the judgment here refers to the court which has sentenced the defendant to the punishment, and the court which has dismissed the appeal against the judgment which has sentenced this punishment, is not the court which has sentenced the defendant, but the party member's decision (see, e.g., Supreme Court Order 4294 type45 Decided June 7, 1962, Supreme Court Order 69 seconds65 Dated Jan. 9, 1970).
The application of this case is an objection under Article 489 of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is evident by the statement of the application itself. According to the records, the defendant was sentenced to punishment in violation of the Martial Law Act and appealed to the Supreme Court through the second instance court, the Korean Army, High Military Court, which was the second instance court, but it is evident that the dismissal of appeal was sentenced on June 9, 1981. Thus, the party member does not fall under the court which sentenced the judgment under Article 489 of the CPA,
Ultimately, the objection of this case is unlawful, and it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.
Justices Lee Lee Sung-soo (Presiding Justice)