In case where an offender of special larceny has fleded to different ways after committing a crime, and one of them has inflicted an injury upon him/her by assaulting for the purpose of evading arrest, the rest of the crime shall be punished.

In a case where a special thief offender was aware of the crime, thereby escapeing through different ways, and either of them committed an act of assaulting to escape arrest, the remaining criminal cannot be deemed to have committed an assault as mentioned above in order to avoid arrest of the said accomplice. Thus, the crime of robbery and injury by robbery under Articles 337 and 335 of the Criminal Act cannot be exempted.

Articles 331, 335, and 337 of the Criminal Act

Supreme Court Decision 83Do321 Delivered on February 28, 1984

Defendant and Appellant for Custody

Defendant and Appellant for Custody

Attorney Choi Jae-hoon

Seoul High Court Decision 84No733,84No138 delivered on July 10, 1984

The appeal is dismissed.

The detention days after the appeal shall be included in the imprisonment for thirty days.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

On the other hand, the record review is acceptable to the facts constituting the offense of the judgment of the court below, and there is no illegality in the preparation of evidence that has been completed in the process.In theory, there is no evidence to conclude that the confession of the defendant in the prosecution and the co-defendant in the court below is false or that there is no evidence to conclude that the confession in the court below is false or that there is no evidence to conclude it. The theory of the lawsuit cited in the violation of the rules of evidence and the theory of the lawsuit claiming the misunderstanding of facts is reasonable, and it is obvious that it

In addition, according to the records, as acknowledged by the court below, the defendants and non-indicted 1 conspired to retail and cut off the knife of the victim Lee Young-hee by combining each knife with each other in preparation for them, but when the crime was discovered, the co-defendant 1 of the court below divided the victim Song Nam-ho and Kim Jong-ho, and the defendant and non-indicted 1 of the court below committed an injury to the defendant, who had a knife in possession for the purpose of evading arrest as they got a converging the knife with the above knife with the knife for the above knife with the knife with the above knife for the purpose of evading arrest, and the co-defendant 1 of the court below's decision that the above knife with the defendant joint defendant and the non-indicted 1 of the court below did not constitute the crime of assault against the defendant 37 of the crime of assault by the co-defendant 1 of the court below.

There is no objection to the custody case.

Therefore, all arguments are without merit, and one copy of detention days after the appeal shall be added to the detention days after the appeal. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices Jeon Soo-hee (Presiding Justice)