(영문) 부산지방법원 2014.5.2.선고 2014고합94 판결

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for five years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive. To order the accused to provide community service for 200 hours.

Reasons

Criminal facts

On January 23, 2014, at around 22:00, the Defendant expressed the Defendant’s desire to “macexe” to “macexe” at the victim E (33 years of age) who is a fluorous fluor in Busan, Busan, the Defendant was able to take her face at one time by drinking the Defendant’s face at one time, three times by hand, and two times by drinking the victim’s face. In addition, at the Defendant’s house located in the same Gu F, at around 02:0 the following day, the Defendant saw the victim’s desire to “cexe” to the Defendant at the Defendant’s house located in the same Gu F, and even after making it difficult for the victim to take part in the wall at one hand, and caused the victim to suffer from the head on his/her wall. The victim died from the fluore pule at around 20:20 on Jan. 24, 2014.

Accordingly, the defendant committed violence against the victim, resulting in the death of the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each prosecutor's protocol of examination of the accused;

1. The written statement of each police officer against the defendant and G;

1. A corpse inspection report, a fact-finding report, and an investigation report (in cases of attaching a written autopsy examination report);

1. On-site photographs, actual condition survey photographs;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to report on the occurrence of a disaster, suggestion for direction, each investigation report (investigation into the details of the use of card G for reference, correction and specification of a suspect's date, time, place, correction of a suspect's crime, autopsy, investigation into the time of death of a victim, additional inquiry and transmission as a result of appraisal);

1. Article applicable to criminal facts;

Articles 262, 260(1), and 259(1) of the Criminal Act

1. Suspension of execution;

Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (The following consideration of favorable circumstances among the reasons for sentencing):

1. Social service order;

Judgment on the assertion of the defendant and defense counsel under Article 62-2(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 59 of the Probation, etc. Act

1. Summary of the assertion

The defendant was faced with the victim's head in the wall because the defendant was blick and sealed, and even if the causal relationship is acknowledged between the defendant's act and the death of the victim, the defendant could not have predicted the death of the victim at that time.

2. Determination

As a result of the crime of death by assault, the perpetrator must be at fault, i.e., predictability of the result of death, in addition to the causal relationship between the consequences of assault and death, and such predictability should be strictly determined by taking into account specific circumstances, such as the degree of assault and response of the victim, etc. (see Supreme Court Decision 90Do1596, Sept. 25, 1990).

In light of the above legal principles, this court adopted and examined the following facts: the Defendant, along with the victim and G, returned home with the victim's head and drink in the above D, and the victim scambling the victim's scam in the above D, and the victim scambling the victim's face in the above D, and scambling the victim's scam at the house. The victim scambling the victim's face three times, and the defendant continued to scam the victim's face two times. After that, the Defendant scambling the victim's life and body together with the victim's head, and then the victim scambling the victim's life and body, and the victim scambling the victim's scambling, scambling the victim's scambling, and scambling the victim's body so that he can easily be found to be the victim's body.

Therefore, we cannot accept the above argument of the defendant and his defense counsel.

Reasons for sentencing

[Scope of Punishment] Imprisonment from 3 years to 30 years

[Determination of Punishment] violent crimes, assault crimes, Type 3 (where the result of death has occurred)

[Special Convicted Persons] If the victim is fully responsible for the occurrence of a crime or the expansion of damage, self-denunciation, non-denunciation of punishment (a mitigated element)

[General Convicted Persons] Voluntary Maternity (Mitigations)

[Scope of Recommendation] From September to 3 years (at least two special mitigation areas, and at least two special mitigation persons) of imprisonment, the minimum limit of sentence range recommended in sentencing guidelines shall be mitigated to 1/2)

[Scope of the revised recommended sentence] Three years of imprisonment (which shall be in accordance with the applicable sentence)

[Reasons for Suspension of Execution] In the event that the victim is fully responsible for the occurrence of the crime or the expansion of damage, there are no sources of punishment (the affirmative reasons for each affirmative action), contingent crimes, self-denunciation, serious reflectivity, or criminal records of a stay of execution or more (the reason for each affirmative action)

[Determination of Sentence] The crime of this case with 3 years of imprisonment and 5 years of suspended sentence was committed by the defendant's act of assaulting the victim, such as the victim's her friend and drinking with her head on the wall, on the ground that the victim was under the influence of alcohol, and caused the victim's death by causing cerebrovassis, etc. by causing the victim's death. In light of the circumstances of the crime, method, relationship with the victim, etc., the nature of the crime is not very good. In light of the fact that the crime of this case brought about a significant result that the victim's life, which is the most valuable legal interest, was reduced due to the crime of this case, and the victim's bereaved family members were faced with an unreparable shocked shock and a rioted by the victim, it is inevitable to punish the defendant significantly.

However, the Defendant appears to have committed the instant crime under the influence of alcohol by taking into account the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant committed the instant crime in a somewhat contingent and contingent manner; (b) the Defendant’s failure to commit the instant crime after the commission of the crime; (c) the victim’s failure is broken down and reflected; (d) the bereaved family members, such as the victim’s mother and the victim’s birth, do not want to punish all the Defendant; and (c) the Defendant is also deemed to have considerable mental impulse caused by the death of friendly relatives who do not intend to do so; (d) the Defendant has no record of criminal punishment beyond the fine prior to the instant case; and (e) the Defendant has no record of criminal punishment beyond the fine prior to the instant case; and (e) the Defendant’s age, character and behavior, environment, method and circumstance after the commission of the crime