logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2014.07.17 2014노337
특수절도등
Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant is the victim Samsung Fire Insurance Co., Ltd., LIG damage insurance.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (No. 1; 3 years of imprisonment; 2 years of imprisonment; 10 months of imprisonment) of the lower court is unreasonable.

2. We examine ex officio the above argument of the defendant prior to the determination of ex officio.

On April 208, 2008, each fraud committed on April 20, 2008 against the victim Samsung Fire Marine Insurance Co., Ltd. and LIG Co., Ltd. was committed prior to the crime of violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (the formation of an organization, etc.) which became final and conclusive on April 23, 2011 as stated in the judgment of the court below. Each fraud committed against the above victims constitutes concurrent crimes stipulated in the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act and the punishment should be imposed in accordance with Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act. Although each crime should be sentenced separately as a crime after the final and conclusive judgment, the judgment of the court below did not separate it, but all of them should be deemed concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and applied Article 38(1)2 of the Criminal Act to the same Act for the purpose of 10 months.

On the other hand, as the judgment of the court of first instance appealed in the trial, each crime of the court of second instance against the defendant is concurrent crimes with each other except for each crime before the above final judgment among the judgment of the court of second instance, and one punishment should be adjudicated simultaneously in accordance with Article 38 of the Criminal Act.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below can no longer be maintained.

3. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing, and it is so decided as follows.

[C] The Criminal Procedure Act applies to the criminal facts against the defendant recognized by the court, the summary of the criminal facts and evidence, and the summary of the evidence as stated in the judgment of the court below.

arrow