Requirements for the establishment of quasi-Robbery, and the timing of violence and intimidation.

A quasi-Robbery is established when a thief commits assault or intimidation with a view to returning property to a thief or evading a thief. Therefore, the assault or intimidation is required to commence the commission of the thief and conduct the commission of the thief, immediately after the commission of the thief, or immediately after the commission of the commission of the thief.

Articles 330 and 335 of the Criminal Act

Supreme Court Decision 67Do334 Decided April 23, 1968

Defendant and Appellant for Custody

An applicant for concurrent Office of the Defendant

Attorney Lee Jin-hoon

Daegu High Court Decision 84No71,84No14 delivered on May 18, 1984

The appeal is dismissed.

The number of days under detention after an appeal shall be included in the imprisonment.

The grounds of appeal by the defendant and the respondent for defense and the state appointed defense counsel are also examined.

1. Examining the evidence of the judgment of the court of first instance held by the court below in light of the records, it is not clear that the defendant and the respondent of the court of first instance entered the victim's house for the purpose of larceny at night, such as the time of original trial, and when the defendant and the respondent came to the victim's house for the purpose of larceny, he was discovered in the victim's wife and went to the victim's body, and when he was found to have been exposed to the victim who had been satisfing over the victim's body, and when he was faced with the escape during the escape of arrest, and there was no error in the rules of evidence in the process of fact finding by examining the evidence preparation.

2. Quasi-Robbery is established when a thief commits assault or intimidation for the purpose of recovery of stolen property or resistance, etc. Therefore, the assault or intimidation takes place in the stage where the commission of the larceny was in progress, or immediately after the commission of the larceny or immediately after the commission of the thief or immediately after the commission of the thief, and it is recognized that the criminal act has not been completed by social norms. Thus, even if the defendant and the respondent for thief entered the victim's house outside of the victim's house for the purpose of larceny at night prior to the thiefing of the stolen object, as in the time of the original adjudication, even if the defendant and the respondent for thief were aware of the thief and continued to be sciefed, or committed assault against the victim with the intent to escape property, such place shall be deemed to have been an act of assaulting during the course of the larceny, such as theory, even if it was 200 meters away from the scene of the crime.

There is no argument that the crime of quasi-Robbery is established on the ground that the time when the defendant and the respondent assaulted the thief is prior to commencement of the larceny or after the thief status has already been lost.

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

Justices Lee Lee Sung-soo (Presiding Justice)