logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2013.12.20 2013노1995
사기등
Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant was suffering from Maulule, etc. at the time of the instant charges, and the Defendant weak the ability to discern things or make decisions in a state of mental disorder due to Maule, etc. at the time of the instant charges.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant (three million won of a fine) is too unreasonable.

2. On April 5, 2013, the record of this case reveals that the Defendant was sentenced to two years to imprisonment for a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, etc. by the Daegu District Court on April 5, 2013 and the said judgment became final and conclusive on June 5, 2013. As can be seen, the crime of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, etc. (thief) and the crime of this case, which became final and conclusive, are related to the latter concurrent crimes under Article 37(1) of the Criminal Act, and are determined by the court below after taking into account the case at the same time and the equity

However, the defendant's argument about mental disorder is still subject to the judgment of this court, despite the above reasons for ex officio reversal.

3. It is true that the defendant suffered from friendly disorder, etc.; however, according to the mental appraisal statement in the Daegu District Court 2012 Godan2541 case against the defendant, the defendant's awareness is clear, the remaining ability is preserved, and the mental disorder is expressed such as fear of disease and mental heart, decrease of self-esteem, and future in mind, but it does not seem to have a systematic network or related accident. In addition, the content of the crime in this case is that the defendant acquired the property by illegally using another person's credit card who was deprived of possession. The content, process and investigation of the crime in this case and the statement and attitude of the defendant in the process of trial.

arrow