logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산고등법원 (창원) 2017.09.06 2017노128
살인미수
Text

All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

Reasons

Defendant A had no intention to kill the victim E, K, or F at the time of the occurrence of the instant case.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found this part of the facts charged guilty is erroneous by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the judgment.

misunderstanding of the legal principles, Defendant A suffered an attack from the victim E, and there was a knife using a knife to defend it, which constitutes a legitimate defense or excessive defense.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below convicting this part of the facts charged is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles, which affected the judgment.

Defendant A with mental disorder shall be mitigated inasmuch as he/she was physically and mentally deprived or physically weak at the time of committing the instant crime due to drinking alcohol at the time of the instant crime.

Since Defendant A voluntarily surrenders himself/herself, punishment should be mitigated.

The punishment sentenced by the court below to Defendant A (three years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

Defendant

Defendant E’s misunderstanding of the facts of E is the first victim B’s speech, and the victim B’s head was sealed several times, and did not assault the victim B’s face.

misunderstanding of the legal principles, Defendant E was only sealed several times of the victim’s head. The victim A entered the victim’s 102 head room with Defendant E and reached the defendant E in a knife, followed the victim’s B and C assaulted Defendant E several times with beer disease, and Defendant E, who was used on the knife floor, was faced with the face of the victim’s knife with a knife and knife. Thus, Defendant E’s act constitutes legitimate defense or excessive defense.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below convicting this part of the facts charged is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles, which affected the judgment.

The punishment sentenced by the court below to Defendant E (one year of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution) is too unreasonable.

Defendant .

arrow