(영문) 서울고등법원 2014.04.03 2013노3747 | 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) 서울고등법원 2014.04.03 2013노3747

마약류관리에관한법률위반(향정)

Text

The judgment below

Of them, the part against Defendant A shall be reversed.

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment for five years.

seizure Doz.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The punishment sentenced by the court below to Defendant A (seven years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The sentence of imprisonment (three years of imprisonment, five years of suspended execution, and two years of probation) imposed by the court below on Defendant B is too uneased and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The judgment on the grounds of appeal by Defendant A had the record of having already been sentenced five times as a crime of the same kind even before the instant case, Defendant A administered the instant crime again during the period of repeated crime, and further imported a large quantity of penphones into the Republic of Korea. Furthermore, in light of the fact that the harm and injury inflicted on the society is very significant, and in particular, in the case of penphones, the toxic or harmful effects of the instant crime are larger than other narcotics, the nature of the instant crime cannot be charged with the responsibility corresponding thereto.

However, when Defendant A committed the instant crime at the trial, it appears that all of the instant crimes were recognized and the mistake is divided. Defendant A’s criminal intent regarding the instant crime of smuggling was induced by the inducer, which may be considered in the course of the instant crime, and Defendant A’s attempt to commit the instant crime was relatively low to the extent of 31.7%, Defendant A was seized, and all of the imported penphones were not distributed at the time, and Defendant A contributed to arresting the inducer of the instant crime of smuggling import, taking into account other various sentencing conditions indicated in the record, such as character and conduct, environment, motive and circumstance of the instant crime, method and consequence of the crime, and circumstance after the crime, etc., Defendant A’s argument on unfair sentencing is reasonable, and thus, Defendant A’s assertion on unfair sentencing is reasonable.

B. The judgment of Defendant B on the grounds of appeal by the prosecutor is that not only administered philophones but also closely imported them.

유사 판례

-서울고등법원 2011.01.20 2010노2475

-서울고등법원 2013.12.26 2013노3411

-서울고등법원 2012.12.20 2012노3145

-서울고등법원 2019.01.25 2018노2654

-부산고등법원 2018.07.25 2018노127