logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2014.08.21 2014노1557
특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(절도)
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. As to the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes due to an attempted larceny of mistake, the defendant found and attempted to take away from the victim E's wallet while attempted to steals, not to do so, but to steal the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes due to special larceny, even though it was merely a theft with F and it was nothing more than a theft, but the first instance court recognized it and convicted all of the crimes of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes as stated in its reasoning, thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The first sentence of an unreasonable sentencing (two years and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination:

A. Determination of facts as to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts) The following circumstances acknowledged by the first instance court on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes due to attempted larceny (the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes which was lawfully adopted and investigated by the court of first instance, i.e., the victim E did not directly witness the victim's wall at the victim's house when the police investigation was conducted, but the victim was aware that the victim was trying to purchase the victim's wall, and that the victim was aware of the victim's wall wall, and that the victim was aware of the victim's wall wall, and that the defendant was aware of the victim's wall, and then the defendant was able to compensate for damages by taking advantage of the victim's wall delivery, and that the statement was detailed, and that the victim was not showing any circumstance that the victim would have made a false and unfavorable statement to the defendant, who was the first victim, in the court of first instance, Eul, and that the victim made a statement directly to an investigative agency.

arrow