Whether the number of self-employed persons can be specified in the conviction (negative)

A self-denunciation does not constitute a reason to be specified in the conviction under Article 323 of the Criminal Procedure Act because the reason for the necessary mitigation or exemption of the punishment is not a reason to have an effect on the determination of the punishment.

Article 323 of the Criminal Procedure Act, Article 52 of the Criminal Act

Supreme Court Decision 4292Du4788 Decided April 8, 1955

Defendant

Defendant

Attorney Cho Jong-ok

Gwangju High Court Decision 82No892 delivered on February 3, 1983

The appeal is dismissed.

The two days, from among the days of detention pending trial after appeal, shall be included in the principal sentence.

The grounds of appeal by the attorney-at-law of the defendant and the defendant are also examined together.

If evidence is collected at the time of the first instance judgment maintained by the court below, it shall be sufficient to recognize the criminal facts of this case at the time of the original judgment, and it cannot be sent to the defendant for the misconception of facts due to the violation of the rules of evidence, and in light of the provisions of Article 52 of the Criminal Act, it is clear that the self-denunciation does not have any requisite mitigation or exemption reason. Therefore, the assertion on the fact of self-denunciation does not constitute the reason to specify the conviction under Article 323 of the Criminal Procedure Act since it is nothing more than the reason affecting the determination of punishment, and it cannot be said that there is an error of omission of judgment

Therefore, all of the grounds of appeal are without merit, and they are dismissed, and two days of pre-trial detention after the appeal shall be included in the principal sentence in accordance with Article 57 of the Criminal Act. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices Lee Il-young (Presiding Justice)