logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2019.03.07 2018노2951
살인등
Text

Defendant

In addition, all appeals filed by the respondent for attachment order and the prosecutor are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The part of the case against the defendant: the defendant and the person to whom the attachment order was requested, and the person to whom the attachment order was requested (a) the defendant and the person to whom the attachment order was requested (hereinafter referred to as the "defendant") had weak ability to discern things or make decisions due to dementia, depression, and alcohol addiction at the time of the crime of this case.

B) The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant (20 years of imprisonment, confiscation) is too unreasonable and unfair. 2) The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant is too unreasonable and unfair.

B. Part of the claim for an attachment order: It is unreasonable for the court below to dismiss the defendant's request for an attachment order despite the risk of recommitting the murder crime.

2. Determination

A. Part 1 of the Defendant’s case concerning the Defendant’s claim for mental retardation) The lower court also rejected the Defendant’s claim for mental retardation, but the lower court did not accept the said claim in full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the records of this case:

① The Defendant, at an investigative agency, tried to kill and kill the Victim B on the day of the instant case. There was an depression and dementia, making it economically difficult to kill the victim B. In the past, the Defendant attempted to kill the victim B at the later time with the victim B, which was a stude. The C’s house was the first place where the victim B was living with the victim B. Since the victim B frequently went to the C’s house, it was said that the victim B had been living with the victim.

② According to the above statements, the Defendant appears to have moved to the commission of the crime after planning the crime in advance.

B. The judgment of the court below is next to the above circumstances, which are admitted by the records of this case.

arrow