beta
Text
The judgment below
The part against the defendant shall be reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for three years.
Reasons
1. Progression of litigation and scope of adjudication of party members; and
A. The lower court rendered a judgment to the effect that the Defendant and Co-Defendant C, and Co-Defendant C of the lower court, who are the primary facts charged against the Defendant, are innocent; the part concerning the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (thief) and the part concerning the special larceny against the Defendant, which is the ancillary facts charged against the Defendant; and the part concerning the above violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (thief) and the above A of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (thief) against the Defendant; the Defendant’s appeal and prosecutor’s appeal against the Defendant and the prosecutor’s appeal against the Defendant, and the Prosecutor’s appeal against the Defendant were dismissed. The lower court reversed this part of the case and remanded to a party member. Accordingly, the scope of the trial after remanding party members is limited to the part concerning the Defendant in the trial before remand the case.
2. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. In light of the fact that the prosecutor (1) admitted the conspiracy relationship among the Defendants based on the evidence submitted by the prosecutor asserting the misapprehension of the legal principles, the defendant introduced the above A, who was the executor, delivered the tools of the crime, and the defendant was waiting in the vicinity of the scene of the crime and received the share of money immediately after the commission of the crime, etc., the defendant can also be recognized as a time and place cooperative relationship with the above C and A with regard to the special larceny crime, and the defendant can also be recognized as a co-principal because he contributed to the defendant's action, so there is room for recognition as a co-principal. However, the court below acquitted the defendant of this part of the main facts charged by not guilty.