logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구고등법원 2018.07.19 2018노202
일반물건방화
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In the crime of misunderstanding the facts and misunderstanding the legal principles, “public danger” is likely to specifically harm an unspecified number of life, body, or property.

The term "the condition that can be seen" means "the condition that can be seen."

In this case, as stated in the facts charged, the defendant laid a cigarette butts on the plant of the plant of the plant of the plant of the plant of the plant of the plant of the plant of the plant of the plant of the plant.

However, in light of the fact that the defendant is not artificially commercialized into the intermediate material, that the defendant was kept in compliance with it without a wide range of escape from the place where the defendant was in fire, that the reported person who was acting by the defendant was in compliance with the defendant's behavior, that the plant was cut out at a short time, that the fire was the plant and the body of the person on which the bicycle was loaded, that the bicycle was loaded on the wall, that the fire was not destroyed, and that there was no inflammable material, and that there was a specific perception on the occurrence of public danger to the defendant.

Therefore, the defendant cannot be punished as a crime of fire-prevention of general goods because the public danger did not actually occur.

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment, which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts and legal principles, the Defendant also argued to the same effect as the grounds for appeal by the lower court. Accordingly, the lower court’s “public danger” under Article 167(1) of the Criminal Act, which provides for the crime of fire-prevention of general goods, refers to a specific risk that may infringe on the life, body, or property of an unspecified or large number of people, and whether such risk arises or not.

arrow