Details of the crime of robbery and rape in the event of attempted robbery;

The robbery is established as a combination of the crimes of robbery under Articles 33, 335, and 336 of the Criminal Act and the crimes of robbery under Articles 297, 299, and 305 of the same Act and the crimes of rape under Articles 333, 335, and 336 of the same Act, and the robbery is established as a rape of a female, and the robbery shall not be counted, attempted, or committed.

Article 339 of the Criminal Act

Supreme Court Decision 84Do1880 Delivered on October 10, 1984

Defendant and Appellant for Custody

Defendant and Appellant for Custody

Attorney Cho Jae-chul

Daegu High Court Decision 85No964, 85No158 delivered on October 16, 1985

The appeal is dismissed.

The number of days pending trial after appeal shall be included in the imprisonment for twenty-five days.

The grounds of appeal by the defendant and his defense counsel are collected together with each other.

If evidence is collected through the records of the first instance court maintained by the court below, it is sufficient to recognize the risk of recidivism by the defendant, and there is no error of law to criticize that the defendant committed a crime in violation of the rules of evidence and misunderstanding the legal principles as to the risk of recidivism. The so-called robbery rape as prescribed by Article 339 of the Criminal Act is established through rape with the victim's face under Articles 297, 29, and 305 of the Criminal Act, and the robbery is a combination of robbery under Articles 297, 29, and 305 of the same Act, and the robbery is established through rape with the victim's face at the end of Busan Metropolitan City, Metropolitan City, and 300, and the victim's face cannot be found to have been raped by the victim and the victim's face at the same time as the victim's face cannot be found to have been raped by the victim's 1 and the victim's face at the end of Busan Metropolitan City.

Meanwhile, in the case of which the court of first instance affirmed by the court below, 8 years of imprisonment with prison labor and 7 years of protective custody are sentenced to the court of first instance, the decision of the sentence cannot be deemed a legitimate ground of appeal because it is a clear ground of appeal in light of the provisions of Article 383 of the Criminal Procedure Act. Therefore, there is no ground of appeal

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and part of the number of days pending trial after the appeal is to be included in the imprisonment 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 Chang-chul (Presiding Justice)