(영문) 부산고등법원 2015.05.21 2015노111 | 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) 부산고등법원 2015.05.21 2015노111

특수강도등

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than two years and six months.

excessive one sheet (No. 1) seized shall be confiscated.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal in light of the various sentencing conditions in the instant case, the sentence imposed by the lower court (a prison term of three years, excessive forfeiture of one person seized) is too unreasonable.

2. Examining the various sentencing conditions in the instant case, each of the instant offenses is a situation unfavorable to the Defendant, such as: (a) the Defendant forcibly takes cash, etc. at a convenience store by threatening employees who are a deadly weapon during a short period of time; (b) the Defendant transferred the means of access more than eight times; (c) the commission of the crime is very poor in light of the background, method, frequency, risk, etc. of the crime; (d) the Defendant had been subject to criminal punishment by larceny, etc. prior to the instant case; (c) the victim F appears to have suffered considerable mental distress; (d) the transfer of the means of access means of electronic financial transactions is highly likely to cause secondary injury, such as fraud; and (e) the actual use of the means of access by the Defendant for a fraudulent crime.

However, in light of the following: (a) the Defendant led to the confession of all of the instant offenses; (b) the Defendant committed a special robbery and agreed with the victims of larceny; and (c) the Defendant appears to have made a serious effort to recover from damage by further agreement with all the victims of larceny; (d) the amount of money and valuables acquired by the Defendant is relatively minor due to each of the instant offenses; (b) the crime of special robbery appears to have been committed somewhat contingent; and (c) other various sentencing conditions indicated in the instant arguments, including the Defendant’s age, character, conduct and environment; (d) family relationship; (e) the means and method of the instant offense; (e) the motive and process of the offense; and (e) the circumstances after the commission of the offense.

Therefore, the defendant's appeal disputing unfair sentencing is justified.

유사 판례

-서울고등법원 2014.09.26 2014노432

-대전지방법원 서산지원 2014.05.01 2014고합18

-춘천지방법원 2019.03.29 2019고합13

-수원지방법원 안산지원 2014.12.05 2014고합361

-창원지방법원 거창지원 2013.10.17 2013고합14