(영문) 대전지방법원 2019.10.31 2019노1498 | 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) 대전지방법원 2019.10.31 2019노1498

특수절도등

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendants shall be punished by imprisonment for a maximum term of one year and nine months, and a short term of one year and three months.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., the two-year imprisonment, respectively, and the short-term one year and six months) of the lower judgment against the Defendants are too unreasonable.

2. The judgment of the Defendants committed several crimes in a short period, and the number of offenses was interviewed and diverse, and the Defendants committed the instant crime even though they received juvenile protective disposition several times due to the same kind of special larceny, etc., the Defendants committed the instant crime; the amount of damage was large; the Defendants did not receive an aid from most victims; Defendant B driven a stolen vehicle without a driver’s license; Defendant B caused a traffic accident; Defendant B destroyed part of the stolen vehicle; and the Defendants destroyed part of the stolen vehicle.

However, the Defendants recognized each of the crimes of this case and agreed upon the victim AX of this case and the victim EI of buildings in violation of the Road Traffic Act [2018 Godan186] in addition to the judgment of the court below, the Defendants did not have any record of criminal punishment, most of the stolen vehicles stolen by the Defendants were recovered, and returned to the victims. The Defendants agreed to the automobile maintenance shop business owners in the attached Table 3 and 4 of the case [2018 Godan1186] in the judgment of the court below, the victim EH of the fraud crime, and the victim E&251] in the judgment of the court below. In addition, the defendants were found to have been subject to punishment in full view of the circumstances favorable to the Defendants, such as the victim BJ of the crime of this case No. 7 and building EI of buildings in violation of the Road Traffic Act [2019Kadan98] annually agreed with the victim AV and the victim AV of this case, the motive, method and method of the crime of this case, and other circumstances before and after the Defendant’s age of this case.

Therefore, the Defendants’ assertion of unreasonable sentencing is justified.

3. Thus, the defendants' appeal is justified.

참조조문

-도로교통법

유사 판례

-대구지방법원 2014.03.21 2014노99

-의정부지방법원 2013.01.11 2012노1911

-서울고등법원 2015.11.03 2015노1707

-대구고등법원 2013.11.20 2013노373

-전주지방법원 2019.07.10 2019노652