logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 1984. 12. 26. 선고 84도2552 판결
[강도상해][공1985.3.1.(747),298]
Main Issues

Where one of the joint larceny inflicts an injury in order to escape arrest, the nature of the crime of quasi-Robbery and injury on the other person;

Summary of Judgment

In cases where two or more persons jointly larceny, and if one of the offenders commits an act of violence to escape from arrest and thereby inflict an injury, the rest of the offender shall not be deemed to have been able to do so, unless it cannot be deemed that it was impossible.

[Reference Provisions]

Articles 335 and 337 of the Criminal Act

Reference Cases

Supreme Court Decision 82Do1352 delivered on July 13, 1982, 84Do1887, 84Ga296 delivered on October 10, 1983

Escopics

Defendant

upper and high-ranking persons

Defendant

Defense Counsel

Attorney Song Jin-hun

Judgment of the lower court

Seoul High Court Decision 84No1545 delivered on October 11, 1984

Text

The appeal is dismissed.

75 days under detention after an appeal shall be included in the original sentence.

Reasons

The defendant and his defense counsel's grounds of appeal are examined.

In case where two or more persons jointly larceny and inflict an injury on another person by assaulting to escape from arrest, the remaining criminal shall not be exempted from liability for the crime of robbery unless it can be deemed that the other criminal was unable to do so (see Supreme Court Decision 82Do1352, Jul. 13, 1982). According to the trial evidence of the first instance cited by the court below, the defendant, in collaboration with the defendant of the court below, destroyed the entrance door and correction of the victim's 88 can be destroyed to a hoodule which the defendant possessed by the court below, and caused the defendant to steals tobacco of the Western speed, and the defendant 3 of the court below's judgment below was sent to the defendant, and the victim, who escaped with the victim's lock door, had the victim's escape, and the defendant who escaped after the escape, did not know that there was an act of violence or robbery for the purpose of escape from arrest, and thus, the court below's decision of the court below is justified in its finding that it was unlawful.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges on the bench, by applying Article 57 of the Criminal Act, that 75 days of detention after the appeal shall be included in the principal sentence.

Justices Jeong Jong-tae (Presiding Justice)

arrow