beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the Defendant, even though the Defendant misunderstanding of the fact cited the instant case as a DNA and moved out of the store, was led to the voice of the Korea Exchange Board, such as the Defendant’s frank, and was not a behavior with the criminal intent of theft, is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts.
B. The Defendant, at the time of committing the instant crime, was physically and mentally in a state of depression, depression, and recovery.
(c)
The sentence of the court below's unfair sentencing (the amount of 500,000 won) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. The evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of mistake of fact, in particular, the defendant cited a case by the police, and "I am out of the police as it is because I am the same as you am. I am out," but in relation to the question asked for the reason why the damaged article was stolen, we see that "I am a bad and there is no burden."
In light of the fact that “the Defendant did not submit a document to prove that he had received a mental therapy prior to the instant crime,” the record and content of the same crime, and that the Defendant did not present a written opinion that “the Defendant had talked with the mental disorder while complaining of depression, the desire to decrease, etc.” at the cost of January 14, 2016 during the trial of the court, it can be sufficiently recognized that the Defendant intentionally committed larceny as stated in the facts charged.
B. According to the record as to the assertion of mental disorder, the Defendant committed the instant crime under the lack of the ability to discern the object of the instant crime or make decisions.
Since it is not recognized, this part of the defendant's assertion is unacceptable.
(c)
As to the wrongful argument of sentencing, ① the fact that the damaged goods of the instant crime have been returned to the victim is favorable.
② However, the defendant's indictment is suspended for larceny in 2014.