(영문) 부산고등법원 2014.04.23 2014노50 | 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) 부산고등법원 2014.04.23 2014노50

살인미수등

Text

The judgment below

The part of the defendant's case shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than two years and six months.

except that this judgment.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant and the person subject to a request to attach an attachment order (hereinafter “Defendant”) did not have any intention to inflict injury on the victim, and the victim merely took part of the part of the victim by knife as the victim had knife in go beyond the Defendant’s fliff, and the victim was faced with knife. As such, the lower court which found the Defendant guilty of the conjunctive charge was erroneous in matters of law. 2) The sentence of the Defendant sentenced to unfair sentencing (three years and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. Prosecutor 1) In light of the following: (a) misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles, the Defendant expressed the intention of murder to the victim by means of sound, such as “satisfing.” The Defendant, a deadly weapon prepared by him; (b) committing a crime sufficient for the Defendant to kill a person; (c) the Defendant committed a knife a deadly weapon, which is a deadly weapon; (d) thereby causing damage to the victim’s knife at a depth of about 15cm from the margin to the left knife; and (e) there was a criminal conviction of the same kind of murder, the lower court determined otherwise, even if the Defendant had the intention of murder.

B) The sentence imposed on the Defendant is too unjustifiable and unreasonable. 2) Even if the Defendant was found to have committed murder and attempted murder in the attachment order case, it is unreasonable for the lower court to dismiss the Defendant’s request for the attachment order of an electronic tracking device.

2. Determination of the accused case

A. The lower court determined the Defendant’s 1’s assertion of mistake of facts: (a) the Defendant, while interesting, continued to sound the victim as “the victim’s “satisfe,” and “outstanding”; and (b) the Defendant, while making a statement at the time of the instant case, was under the influence of alcohol, she cited it as a matter of course in Australia at the time of the instant case.

유사 판례

-서울고등법원 (춘천) 2021.04.21 2021노10

-서울고등법원 2019.06.27 2019노1083

-대구고등법원 2020.09.10 2020노245

-대전고등법원 2015.02.06 2014노537

-대구고등법원 2014.11.27 2014노510