Liability of other accomplices for murdering act of one of the accomplices of robbery

In the event that one of the accomplices in robbery kills the victim by assaulting or injuringing the victim on the opportunity for robbery, the other accomplices are aware of the fact that the assault or injuring is caused by the means of robbery, so even if there is no conspiracy about the murder, the other accomplices cannot be exempted from the liability for the crime of robbery, even if there is no conspiracy about the murder.

Articles 30 and 338 of the Criminal Act

Defendant

Defendant

Attorney Lee Jung-soo

Seoul High Court Decision 88No775 delivered on May 18, 1988

The appeal is dismissed.

The number of detention days after an appeal shall be included in the calculation of the original sentence.

1. We examine the grounds of appeal No. 1 by the defendant and his defense counsel.

In the event that one of the accomplices in robbery kills the victim by assaulting or injuringing the victim on the opportunity of robbery, the other accomplices are aware of the fact that the assault or injuring is caused by the means of robbery, and thus, the other accomplices cannot be exempted from the liability for the crime of robbery even if there is no conspiracy to murder.

According to the facts established by the court below, at around 02:45 on Nov. 29, 1987, the defendant conspired with Nonindicted 1 and the victim Nonindicted 2 to forcibly take money and valuables, and the defendant takes a knife of about 33 centimeters in length, and the above Nonindicted 1 took a knife of about 80 centimeters in length, and the defendant takes a knife in the above knife of the victim's body plan, the victim Nonindicted 3, who is the wife of the above victim, "hicker", and the knife of the victim's face and the knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knif.

In light of the above facts, the defendant is deemed to have a mutual recognition on the fact that the opportunity for robbery between Nonindicted Party 1, who is an accomplice, would cause assault or bodily injury as a means of robbery. Therefore, as to the result of the murder committed by the said Nonindicted Party 1, the defendant cannot be exempted from the liability for the crime of robbery, and the judgment of the court below to the same purport is just and there is no violation of the law of misunderstanding of legal principles as to the accomplice, or of misunderstanding of a serious mistake of facts, or of

2. We examine the second ground for appeal.

When comprehensively considering the fact that the sentencing of the court below is excessive or that all the forms of punishment shown in the record, the court below did not consider that the sentence of the court below is excessive, so the above issue is groundless.

3. Therefore, the appeal shall be dismissed, and sixty days of detention days after the appeal shall be included in the principal sentence. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices Lee Jae-seok (Presiding Justice)