(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2016.10.21 2016고합291

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) 서울북부지방법원 2016.10.21 2016고합291

강도상해

Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than three years and six months.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On June 1, 2016, at around 02:15, the Defendant opened a entrance with no mind to steals property from the victim E (the age of 63) on the first floor of the building D in Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, and intruded into the house, and collected 300,000 won in cash owned by the victim from the wall inside the house, and continued to find the subject, the Defendant was tightly pushed down the victim several times for the purpose of evading arrest by breaking up the victim from the locking to the toilet, and breaking up the victim’s right side of the victim who would be felblue in the gelbbbb, and the day of treatment on the face of the eyebrow.

As a result, the defendant stolen the victim's property and inflicted an injury on the victim for the purpose of evading arrest.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Statement to E by the police;

1. A written statement prepared by E;

1. Screening pictures of CCTV for escape, on-site photographs;

1. The point of injury in the judgment: Determination on the victim's bodily injury photographs, the defendant and his defense counsel's assertion

1. The summary of the claimant's assertion that intrudes the victim's house and steals cash owned by the victim, and that the victim's face in the course of spreading the victim's face is recognized;

However, the defendant's assault was not to suppress the other party's resistance, and the degree of injury of the victim is minor, so it should be applied to larceny rather than the crime of robbery.

2. Determination

A. Quasi-Robbery is established by a thief’s assault or intimidation for the purpose of resisting property recovery in an opportunity for larceny (Supreme Court Decision 2009Do5022 Decided July 23, 2009). In the crime of quasi-Robbery, assault or intimidation in the crime of quasi-Robbery may be deemed as a means of suppressing other party’s resistance, to the extent that it is generally and objectively recognized as a means of suppressing other party’s resistance, and it does not necessarily require that the thief has practically threatened other party’s resistance.

Supreme Court Decision 200

참조판례

-대법원 2009. 7. 23. 선고 2009도5022 판결

유사 판례

-서울고등법원 2014.11.07 2014노2282

-인천지방법원 2015.01.29 2014고합749

-대법원 1984. 9. 11. 선고 84도1398,84감도214 판결

-서울북부지방법원 2016.11.08 2016고합228

-대전고등법원 (청주) 2013.11.07 2013노127