In cases where life imprisonment, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with prison labor for not less than five years is to be applied to organic penalty by choosing and reducing life imprisonment, or sentence of an irregular term imprisonment;

Article 54 of the Juvenile Act is interpreted to apply only to cases where a sentence of imprisonment, among the statutory penalty prescribed by the death penalty, life imprisonment and imprisonment for a maximum term of at least two years, is chosen. As such, as in this case, the crime of murder, which is legally established by death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment for at least five years, is recognized, and there is no room to apply to cases where the defendant is sentenced to imprisonment for a limited term after choosing the sentence of life among the statutory

Article 54 of the Juvenile Act

December 7, 1965, 65Do967 decided Dec. 7, 1965 (Supreme Court Decision 3858, Decision 54(3)1513, Decision 2 of the Official Gazette Act

Defendant

Daegu District Court (80Gohap93)

The appeal is dismissed.

85 days during the period of detention pending the pronouncement of judgment shall be included in the punishment of the original court.

The gist of the grounds for appeal by the defendant and his defense counsel is as follows: First, in applying the law, the court below shall select each so-called "a life imprisonment" under Article 250 (1) 1 of the Criminal Act at the time of application of the law, and sentenced 15 years to the defendant who is a juvenile after discretionary mitigation under Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act in accordance with the precedent of concurrent crimes under Articles 38 (1) 1 and 50 of the Criminal Act in consideration of the circumstances and considering the circumstances, but when sentenced a limited imprisonment to the juvenile, the court below sentenced the defendant to 15 years of imprisonment as provided in Article 54 of the Juvenile Act (a short-term five years of imprisonment and a long-term 10 years of imprisonment). Second, the defendant was sentenced to 15 years of imprisonment in this case by temporary impulse from the victims who died as a female, and was absent from her own consciousness and so on.

However, in the proviso of Article 54 (1) of the Juvenile Act, the sentence for a juvenile shall only be applied to a case where the sentence for a short term of five years and the maximum term of ten years is chosen from among the statutory penalty, and there is no reason for the first reason for appeal, and in the case of choosing a death penalty or life imprisonment, it shall not be subject to the restriction of the proviso of Article 54 (1) of the Juvenile Act. In addition, the defendant can be recognized as having committed the crime of this case by his impulse who is a woman and is the non-party, but the method of the crime is planned, and the result of the crime is too planned, and it is not recognized that the sentence of the court below is reasonable and too unreasonable in consideration of all circumstances that form the condition for sentencing as shown in the record and pleading, such as the death of two life.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is just, and since the appeal is groundless, it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and 85 days out of the number of days of confinement before the pronouncement of the judgment shall be included in the punishment of the court below pursuant to Article 57 of the Criminal Act. It is so decided as per

Judges Yoon Young-ok (Presiding Judge)