logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2017.06.21 2016고단4017
분묘발굴
Text

The sentence of sentence against the defendant shall be suspended.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On September 23, 2015, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence (4 months of imprisonment) as a crime of excavating a grave at the Suwon Friwon method, and that judgment became final and conclusive on October 1, 2015.

On December 23, 2013, the defendant, who was the president of the species C, discovered at his own discretion one scrap F grave of the victim E, who was the owner of the said clan, in the course of the peaceing work of the land D when he was in the possession of the said clan C.

Summary of Evidence

1. Each legal statement of witness G and H;

1. Statement of witness E in the third public trial protocol;

1. Protocols concerning the examination of suspect partially by the defendant;

1. Statement made to I by the police;

1. A family table, each field photograph, fact-finding certificate, each witness examination protocol, and cemetery layout map;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of Acts and subordinate statutes after inquiring about two copies of judgment and criminal history data;

1. Article 160 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting the crime;

1. After Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Article 39 (1) of the same Act:

1. Two months of imprisonment to be suspended;

1. The grounds for sentencing under Article 59(1) of the suspended sentence under Article 59(1) of the Criminal Act are as follows: (a) the Defendant’s act of this case ought to be subject to criticism in light of the Korean culture that protects and manages the graves of this case; (b) the Defendant appears to have excavated the graves of this case in order to manage the graves located in the forests and fields owned by the clan as the chairperson of the clan of this case; (c) the Defendant appears to have been for example before the discovery of the graves; (d) the Defendant agreed with the victim; and (e) the crime of this case is one of the crimes for which the judgment became final (the same date, and at the same place) and the concurrent crimes under Article 37 of the Criminal Act after Article 37 of the Criminal Act, with regard

arrow