beta
Text
The judgment below
The guilty part shall be reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The petroleum that was stolen from Asan City B during May 3, 2018 to May 4, 2018 (hereinafter “instant petroleum No. 1”).
In full view of the facts charged by the Defendant at the investigative agency, and the statements made by N and D at the investigative agency correspond to the Defendant’s confessions, it is reasonable to view that this part of the facts charged is proven to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt. Therefore, the judgment of the court below that acquitted the Defendant of this part of the facts charged is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts, since it is not consistent with the Defendant’s assertion on this part of the remaining petroleum (hereinafter “instant petroleum”) except gasoline 10,000 liters, among the petroleum that were stolen from Osan City L around June 23, 2018, around June 25, 2018, it is reasonable to view that this part of the facts charged is proven to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt for deliberation. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below that acquitted the Defendant of this part of the facts charged is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts.
B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one year of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, and 160 hours of community service) is too uneasible and unreasonable.
2. Judgment on the prosecutor's assertion of mistake of facts
A. In a criminal trial of relevant legal principles, the conviction should be based on the evidence of probative value, which makes it possible for a judge to have the truth of the facts charged to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt, and if there is no evidence to form such a degree of conviction, the defendant is suspected of guilt even if there is no evidence to establish such a degree.
Even if there is no choice but to judge the interests of the defendant.
(See Supreme Court Decision 9Do4305 delivered on February 25, 2000, etc.). B.
The lower court seems to have judged that the portion of the petroleum No. 1 of the instant case is consistent with the facts charged in its reasoning.