(영문) 대구지방법원 2016.07.14 2015노1464 | 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) 대구지방법원 2016.07.14 2015노1464

특수절도

Text

All of the appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although the Defendants were found to have stolen 1.3 million won in cash as stated in the judgment of the court below, the court below found the Defendants not guilty of the part on the theft of 1.3 million won in cash among the facts charged in this case, the court below erred in the misapprehension of facts.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendants (each of six months of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, and 80 hours of community service) is deemed unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. On November 6, 2014, the summary of this part of the facts charged is as follows: (a) the Defendants discovered mountain mark, which is the victim’s possession of cash 1.3 million won (the part found guilty) in cash 500,000 won (the 800,000 won in cash (the part found guilty) in the above Pakistan), i.e., KRW 1.3 million on the front of the E cafeteria located in Kimcheon-si, Kimcheon-si; and (b) Defendant A carried it together with the Defendant B.

Accordingly, the Defendants, together, stolen 1,300,000 won of cash, which is the property of the victim.

2) The lower court and the lower court, based on its detailed reasoning from the 3th page 10 to 4th page 18 of the lower judgment, committed a theft of cash KRW 1,300,000 [the amount of cash KRW 800,000,000 in cash (the portion found guilty) in the above Pakistan) as stated in this part of the facts charged, in addition to the facts that the Defendants stolen Pacific including KRW 80,00,000,00,000,000 as stated in the facts charged.

It is difficult to see

In view of this, the lower court acquitted this part of the charges.

Examining the above judgment of the court below in a thorough comparison with the records, the above judgment of the court below is just and it is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts.

subsection (b) of this section.

Therefore, prosecutor's assertion of mistake is without merit.

B. The Defendants did not reach an agreement with the victim with regard to the wrongful assertion of sentencing is disadvantageous to the Defendants.

On the other hand, however, it is.

유사 판례

-서울북부지방법원 2017.09.14 2017노950

-서울고등법원 2016.09.09 2016노1802

-서울고등법원 2017.11.02 2017노1887

-창원지방법원 2016.09.29 2016노1164

-수원지방법원 2017.06.22 2016노7033