(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2014.11.14 2014노3277

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) 서울중앙지방법원 2014.11.14 2014노3277

특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(절도)

Text

The judgment of the first instance is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds of appeal is as follows: First, at the time, the defendant was aware of the fact that the steel bars of this case were discarded, and second, the defendant was trying to make a living cost by selling the goods due to the difficulties of living due to the monthly salary of security guards, not habitually committing the crime; third, the defendant committed the crime of this case in the state of mental disorder or mental disorder due to the mental disorder such as gambling of military register, and fourth, the sentencing of the first instance court (two years of imprisonment) against the defendant is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Before determining the grounds for appeal for ex officio determination, the prosecutor tried to examine the facts charged in the instant case ex officio, and the prosecutor tried to amend the indictment to add “the Defendant cited a 200,000 won of the market price, which is the victim N in the above restaurant entrance, at around 00:20 on May 18, 2014, the victim N in the front of the “M cafeteria” located in the Dongjak-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government L, 1,000 won,” and the judgment of the first instance cannot be maintained as it was changed by the court’s permission.

However, despite the above reasons for ex officio reversal, the remaining grounds for appeal except for the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing are still subject to the judgment of this court, and this is examined below.

B. First of all, the judgment on the grounds for appeal, and the evidence duly adopted and examined by the first instance court, the Defendant’s assertion that the instant iron bars 40 that were stolen by the Defendant was kept as materials used at the construction site by cutting them out to the outside at the time, and thus, the Defendant’s assertion that the Defendant was aware of the fact that it was objectively known that it was another person’s property possessed by the other person. As such, the Defendant’s assertion to the effect that the Defendant knew that it was an object to be discarded

In addition, evidence and records are based on the records.

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2015.03.27 2014노5188

-서울고등법원 2014.01.24 2013노3210

-서울중앙지방법원 2015.01.09 2014노2569

-서울동부지방법원 2016.10.20 2016고단2774

-서울중앙지방법원 2014.08.22 2014노1855