logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산고등법원 (창원) 2018.05.30 2018노34
살인미수등
Text

The judgment below

Part 1 and 2 of the judgment shall be reversed.

The defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for the crimes Nos. 1 and 2 of the above judgment.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant attempted to discontinue the crime (misunderstanding of the facts or misapprehension of the legal doctrine as to the crime No. 1 in its holding) was committing murder by breaking the victim’s head with a view to breaking the victim’s head, and the victim was able to see himself/herself and herself to take care of, and receive treatment from, the hospital after having ceased the crime.

Although this constitutes an attempted suspension, the court below rejected the argument.

B. The punishment sentenced by the court below (with respect to each of the crimes in its holding) is too unreasonable (one month of imprisonment with prison labor for the crimes in its holding Nos. 1 and 2 and three crimes in its holding).

2. Determination

A. The judgment of the court below as to the attempted crime (see Supreme Court Decisions 97Do957 delivered on June 13, 1997, 99Do640 delivered on April 13, 199), where the commission of a crime was commenced and the crime was suspended at one’s own free will before the completion of the crime, it shall be deemed as a attempted crime unless the suspension by the person appears to be an attempted crime under ordinary social norms, such as playing or drinking, etc., in the course of the crime. However, if the defendant committed an attempted crime due to the circumstances obstructing the completion of the crime under ordinary social norms, it shall not be deemed as a voluntary attempted crime (see Supreme Court Decisions 9Do957 delivered on April 13, 199, 9Do640 delivered on April 13, 199). Based on the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, the court below's judgment of the court below, based on the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the defendant, which held that the victim’s head was no longer able by the victim’s sen or decil.

arrow