logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2016.06.02 2016노655
야간주거침입절도등
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although the Defendant, at the time of committing the instant crime, was in a state of mental and physical weakness due to the heart disease, and thus, he should have mitigated the Defendant’s mental and physical weakness, the lower court’s judgment was unlawful.

B. The sentence of the lower court (a prison term of eight months and a fine of 300,000 won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the records of the instant case’s assertion of mental and physical weakness, the fact that the Defendant received hospitalized treatment at a hospital of the Joseon University from October 29, 2015 to November 2, 2015, due to the death of the dead heart disease is recognized.

However, the above facts alone are insufficient to recognize that the defendant lacks the ability to discern things or make decisions due to mental or physical disorder at the time of the crime of this case, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is not accepted.

B. The following points are the circumstances favorable to the Defendant for determining the unfair argument of sentencing.

The amount of damage caused by the Defendant’s at night intrusion theft crime of this case is not significant, and the victims do not want punishment because the damaged goods were returned to the victims.

The defendant is recognized as committing his crime and is against his will.

There are minor children and parents to support the accused.

On the other hand, the following is disadvantageous.

Prior to the instant case, the Defendant had been punished six times as a thief by committing the larceny, and among them, many punishments are included therein.

Since the defendant committed the crime of this case during the period of probation, it is inevitable to sentence him/her as sentence.

The Defendant had been punished for driving without a license even before the instant case, while driving without a license was revoked due to driving without a license, but thereafter driving with a previous driver's license is revoked.

arrow