(영문) 서울고등법원 2018.08.16 2018노1059 | 리걸엔진

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울고등법원 2018.08.16 2018노1059

강도살인미수등

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for seven years.

Items 1 through 14, 20, and 22 of the seized evidence, respectively.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Fact-misunderstanding and legal principles 1) The nesle distance, when the Defendant intended to escape from the victim L's pressure, was mistakenly knife with the victim's side knife with the victim's knife with the victim's side knife. The Defendant, a security guard of the building of this case immediately before committing the crime against the victim L, inflicted a threat only to tear a knife with the victim's knife, and immediately after the occurrence of the result of injury against the victim, the Defendant knew about the victim's L's condition and had an intention to murder the victim.

shall not be deemed to exist.

2) The Defendant’s act of intrusion upon a residence to commit a special robbery as prescribed in Article 334(2) of the Criminal Act is not a separate special crime of intrusion upon a house by absorbing the attempted murder of robbery.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (nine years of imprisonment, confiscation) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In the first instance trial, the ex officio judgment prosecutor applied for amendments to a bill of amendment to the indictment with the content that “buckbucks shall delete the parts of the charges for murdered robbery once consecutively.” Since this court permitted this and changed the contents of the judgment, the judgment of the court below as to this part of the charges cannot be maintained any more.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below should be reversed in its entirety, since the court below dealt with this part of the facts charged and each of the remaining facts stated in the judgment of the court below as concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and sentenced to

However, the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding the facts and misapprehension of the legal principles still exists, which is subject to the judgment of this court, will be examined below.

B. Determination 1 on the Defendant’s assertion of misunderstanding the facts and legal principles

참조조문

-형법 제334조 제2항

유사 판례

-부산고등법원 (창원) 2018.07.11 2018노12

-광주고등법원 (제주) 2016.04.06 2015노105

-대구고등법원 2018.06.27 2018노115

-서울고등법원 2018.10.11 2018노1252

-부산고등법원 2017.05.24 2016노786