logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산고등법원 2019.07.18 2019노128
마약류관리에관한법률위반(대마)
Text

All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant B and C found the Defendant’s house in the South African Republic, and they were forced to take part in the instant crime by threatening the Defendant and threatening the Defendant. Thus, the punishment imposed by the lower court (three years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The above sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below is too uneasible and unfair.

2. The Defendant, ex officio, denied that there was no participation in the invitation to import of marijuana at the time when the first investigation agency conducted an investigation, and subsequently recognized that he committed the crime. However, as stated in the facts constituting the crime in the judgment below, the Defendant stated that the Defendant’s entry into the Republic of Korea with the possession of marijuana was due to intimidation B and C known in the South Africa Republic, and ex officio, and therefore, whether the Defendant’s crime in the instant case constitutes “an act of coerciond by intimidation without any means to defend the life or body of the Defendant or relatives” under Article 12 of the Criminal Act can not be punished.

Violence under Article 12 of the Criminal Code refers to a case in which physical acts cannot be absolutely performed in a psychological meaning or a case in which force is strong in ethical meaning. Intimidation means a intimidation in which one or a relative does not have any way to prevent harm to the life, body, or life or body of himself/herself or relatives, and coercion means to force a specific act by preventing the forced person from making a free decision-making.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 83Do2276, Dec. 13, 1983). However, according to the records of this case, the following circumstances recognized as follows, namely, the Defendant’s communications with B and C using mobile phone messages at a flight aircraft are too high to R.

They are too well grounded on them.

arrow