(영문) 광주지방법원 2018.01.10 2017노3843 | 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) 광주지방법원 2018.01.10 2017노3843

폭력행위등처벌에관한법률위반(공동공갈)등

Text

The judgment below

Of them, the part against Defendant C shall be reversed.

Defendant

C A person shall be punished by imprisonment of one year and four months.

Defendant

A. A.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The lower court’s sentencing against the Defendants is too unreasonable.

B. The lower court’s sentencing against the Defendant A and B of the Prosecutor is too uncomfortable.

2. Determination

A. Considering the fact that the nature of the crime in this case, Defendant A, and B, the degree of participation in the crime in Defendant A and B, etc., strict punishment against Defendant A and B is necessary.

However, considering the conditions of sentencing specified in the pleadings of this case, such as Defendant A and B’s age, sexual conduct and environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, etc., the sentence imposed by the court below on Defendant A and B is deemed appropriate, and is too heavy or unreasonable, and thus, the above argument by Defendant A, B and the prosecutor is without merit.

B. Considering that the nature of the crime of this case committed by Defendant C is not significantly good, that Defendant C committed the crime of this case during the period of probation, and that there are considerable number of unauthorized driving frequency, strict punishment against Defendant C is necessary.

However, in the case of Defendant C’s misunderstanding, Defendant C does not want the punishment of Defendant C in agreement with the victim in the trial, and considering the age of Defendant C, sexual conduct and environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable, and thus, Defendant C’s above assertion is reasonable, given that it is too unreasonable in light of the following factors: (a) the sentencing balance with other accomplices; and (b) the age of Defendant C, sexual conduct and environment; (c) the motive, means and consequence of the crime; and (d) the circumstances after the crime.

3. In conclusion, Defendant C’s appeal is with merit, and thus, pursuant to Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, the part concerning Defendant C among the judgment below is reversed, and the appeal by Defendant A, B and the prosecutor is again decided as follows. The appeal by the Defendant A, B and the prosecutor is without merit.

유사 판례

-서울고등법원 2016.03.31 2015노3608

-광주지방법원 2018.04.25 2017노4718

-광주지방법원 2018.01.31 2017노4487

-광주지방법원 2017.03.29 2016노1431

-광주지방법원 2018.02.07 2017노3789