(영문) 수원지방법원 2017.12.01 2017노5150 | 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) 수원지방법원 2017.12.01 2017노5150

절도

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of the facts) is the fact that the defendant brought about the wall, but the defendant knew that he was abandoned due to the empty walling, and it is doubtful that the victim intentionally left the CCTV photographing place, not his own possession, and brought about it.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous and adversely affected by the judgment.

2. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court, namely, ① the victim had been posted on the cash payment season at the court of the lower judgment.

At the time, the reason for memory is that there was an amount equivalent to KRW 300,000,000, and it is because the daily allowance received as a result of the passage of the party accompanying the party, was put in the party A, and the written statement prepared by the police was also consistent with the above statement if it excludes a somewhat different amount of difference in the value of the party A, and the claimed amount of damage was not large. Thus, the statement was made in exaggeration of the amount of damage.

However, according to CCTV images taken at the time of the crime of this case, it is difficult to see that the defendant brought about without regard to the lock, and even if based on the police statement by the defendant, it is difficult to see that the defendant brought about another person's wall.

Since the defendant's defense that he was aware of the abandoned wall, it is difficult to believe the defendant's defense as it is, and ③ the victim intentionally posted a wall at a place where CCTV was taken.

In full view of the fact that there is no specific basis or material to think, the defendant's act of theft and the intention of larceny, which caused the cash of the victim, is recognized.

Therefore, the lower court’s conclusion that found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged.

유사 판례

-광주지방법원 순천지원 2018.12.17 2017고정593

-서울동부지방법원 2019.09.19 2019노742

-부산지방법원 2019.10.18 2019노1479

-수원지방법원 안산지원 2016.07.14 2016고정545

-대구지방법원경주지원 2020.09.03 2019고단720