logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 2017.09.07 2017도9581
사기등
Text

The appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

The grounds of appeal are examined.

Criminal facts have to be proved to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt (Article 307(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act). However, the preparation of evidence and the probative value of evidence conducted on the premise of fact-finding belong to the free judgment of the fact-finding court (Article 308 of the Criminal Procedure Act). For the reasons stated in its reasoning, the lower court determined that the Defendant was not in a state or lacks ability to discern things or make decisions at the time of committing the instant crime, and rejected the grounds for appeal claiming mental or physical disorder.

Of the grounds of appeal, the argument that the lower court’s determination on the facts leading to such determination among the grounds of appeal is merely an error of the lower court’s determination on the selection of evidence and probative value, which belong to the free judgment of the fact-finding court, and even if examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the aforementioned legal doctrine and the evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err in its judgment by exceeding the bounds of free evaluation principle, contrary

In addition, pursuant to Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor for not less than ten years is imposed, an appeal is permitted for the wrongful grounds for sentencing. Thus, the argument that the amount of punishment is unfair is not a legitimate ground for appeal in this case where a more minor sentence is imposed against the defendant.

Meanwhile, the ground of appeal to the effect that the court below erred in the misapprehension of legal principles is not a legitimate ground of appeal since the defendant's ground of appeal or the court below's decision was not subject to an ex officio decision.

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

arrow