logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2020.06.10 2019노3289
절도등
Text

All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

Defendant

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

(b).

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A1) The Defendant was under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing the thief and the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Aggravated Injury) on May 17, 2019 and the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes. (2) Each punishment of the lower judgment against the Defendant on unfair sentencing (Article 1: 1.6 months of imprisonment and 2. 8 months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant 1) The Defendant was in the state of having the ability to discern things or make decisions due to the fact that the mind was mixed at the time of each of the larceny and special larceny crimes in this case, on the wind of unexplosion, etc.

2. Determination on Defendant A’s grounds for appeal

A. It is recognized that the defendant was in a certain state of drinking alcohol at the time of each of the above crimes, but it seems that the defendant's judgment on the claim of mental disability was in a weak state of the ability to discern things or make decisions. Therefore, this part of the defendant's assertion cannot be accepted.

B. B. Prior to the judgment on the Defendant’s assertion of unfair sentencing, prior to the judgment on the Defendant’s assertion of unfair sentencing, the lower judgment on the Defendant was sentenced separately, and each appeal was filed, and this court decided to concurrently deliberate on each of the above appeals cases. Each of the offenses of the lower judgment is a concurrent offense relationship under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and thus, one sentence should be imposed under Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. In this regard,

3. Determination on the grounds for appeal by Defendant O

A. The Defendant is merely asserting that the mental state was a mixed state at the time of each of the instant crimes, and there is no evidence to acknowledge this.

arrow