(영문) 대구지방법원 2015.02.05 2014노3633 | 리걸엔진

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 대구지방법원 2015.02.05 2014노3633

상해등

Text

All the judgment below is reversed.

Defendant

A Imprisonment with prison labor for one year and for six months, respectively.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. There is no misunderstanding of facts (Defendant A) as to the remainder of the facts constituting an offense except for the bodily injury as indicated in the judgment of the court below.

In the judgment of the court below that found all of the facts charged of this case guilty, there is an error of misconception of facts.

B. The sentence of unfair sentencing (Defendant A: Imprisonment with prison labor for one year and four months, and Defendant B: 10 months) imposed by the court below on the Defendants is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the ex officio judgment records as to Defendant B, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for 10 months, 2 years of probation, and 160 hours of probation and community service order in the branch court of the Daegu District Court on September 19, 2014, and the judgment became final and conclusive on September 27, 2014.

Since the crime of this case is related to the crime subject to the above final judgment and the crime subject to the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, the punishment shall be determined after examining whether to reduce or exempt punishment in consideration of equity in the case of concurrent judgment pursuant to Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act. Since the application of the statutes of the court below was omitted, the part of the judgment of the court below as to the

B. Determination on Defendant A’s assertion 1) In full view of the determination of mistake of facts (excluding the crime of injury) (the confession made by the Defendants in the lower court as well as the remaining evidence, Defendant A conspired with Defendant B to use the resident registration certificate and to make an application for new mobile phone entry by forging private documents as stated in the lower court’s holding, it may sufficiently recognize the fact that Defendant A acquired the mobile phone by deceiving the victims,

Defendant

B The testimony to the effect that Defendant A did not participate in this part of the crime at the court of first instance is not reliable.

The court below's finding Defendant A guilty of this part of the facts charged is just and erroneous.

참조조문

-형법 제39조 제1항

유사 판례

-대구지방법원 2014.12.30 2014노3967

-대구지방법원 2014.09.25 2014노2055

-대구지방법원 2014.11.20 2014노3003

-대구지방법원 2014.05.22 2013노3770

-대구지방법원 2014.03.13 2013노3646