(영문) 서울고등법원 2018.02.07 2017노3690 | 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) 서울고등법원 2018.02.07 2017노3690

강도치상등

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) by the lower court (an imprisonment of 4 years and a fine of 300,000 won) is too unreasonable.

2. Considering the unique area of sentencing of the first instance that is respected under the principle of trial priority and the principle of direct determination under the Criminal Procedure Act, and the ex post facto core nature of the appellate court, the first instance sentencing judgment exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion in light of the following factors: (a) the conditions of sentencing specified in the process of the first instance sentencing hearing and the sentencing criteria, etc.

In light of the records newly discovered in the course of the appellate court’s sentencing hearing, it is reasonable to file an unfair judgment of the first instance court, only in cases where it is deemed unfair to maintain the sentencing of the first instance court as it is for the court to judge the sentencing of the first instance court.

Unless there exist such exceptional circumstances, it is desirable to respect the sentencing of the first instance trial (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The following are the circumstances favorable to the Defendant: (a) the Defendant does not have any criminal records and criminal records of the same kind of robbery or injury; (b) the Defendant reflects the Defendant’s depth in committing the crime; (c) the victims do not want the Defendant’s punishment; (d) the Defendant, who was living in the process of life, appears to have caused the instant crime by contingency; (b) the Defendant was not intentionally inflicted the injury on the victim; and (c) the Defendant’s family members and his/her employees want to take the preference against the Defendant.

However, the crime of this case committed the crime of this case by the defendant prepared a knife on the new wall, took a knife a knife on the knife, and enter a convenience store to enter the place where the crime was committed, and taking money and valuables into the place where the knife threatens the knife, and taking the victim's injury at other places. In light of the method and frequency of the crime, the crime and the method and result

참조판례

-대법원 2015. 7. 23. 선고 2015도3260 전원합의체 판결

유사 판례

-서울고등법원 2018.05.09 2018노475

-서울고등법원 2017.10.11 2017노2148

-대전지방법원 2018.10.18 2018노2066

-춘천지방법원 2017.12.06 2017노957

-춘천지방법원 2018.01.31 2017노535