logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2019.05.03 2019노719
공갈등
Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant did not know of facts and misapprehension of the legal principles (as to the crime No. 1 in the judgment of the court below), that there was no threat of harm to the point of causing assault or fear of the victim E.

B. The sentence of imprisonment (one year of imprisonment) imposed by the court below on the defendant is too unreasonable.

2. We examine ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal ex officio.

On August 9, 2018, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for 6 years and a fine of 3 million won for violating the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, etc. at Suwon District Court, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on March 28, 2019.

Since each crime against the defendant in the judgment of the court below is one of the concurrent crimes provided for in the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act with the above Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, the sentence shall be imposed in consideration of equity with the case where the judgment is concurrently rendered pursuant to Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act. The court below sentenced the sentence without considering it, and therefore the judgment of the court below

However, despite the above reasons for ex officio reversal, the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles is still subject to the judgment of this court, and this is examined below.

3. As to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, the Defendant made the same assertion in the trial of the court below, and the court below found the Defendant guilty of this part of the charges by taking account of the circumstances acknowledged through the evidence duly adopted and examined.

Examining the above judgment of the court below in comparison with the records, the judgment of the court below is just, and it cannot be said that there was an error of law that affected the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding facts or misunderstanding legal principles as alleged by the defendant in the judgment below.

4. Thus, the defendant's assertion of mistake and misapprehension of legal principles is not reasonable, but the judgment of the court below is above.

arrow