(영문) 수원고등법원 2020.05.27 2020노105 | 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) 수원고등법원 2020.05.27 2020노105

현주건조물방화미수

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for nine months.

One set of divers (No. 1) seized.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant (a person with mental disability, and an unreasonable sentencing) 1) had weak ability or decision-making capacity to distinguish things at the time of the instant crime. Nevertheless, the lower court did not recognize the Defendant’s state of mental disability, which erred by misapprehending the facts, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the state of mental disability. 2) The sentence (6 months of imprisonment) sentenced by the lower court of unreasonable sentencing is excessively unreasonable.

B. In light of the fact that a prosecutor (the fact-finding, the error of unfair sentencing) 1) misjudgments the fact (the acquittal part of the reasoning in the original decision) (the acquittal part of the defendant's reasoning), which is a intermediate object, immediately deserts the site, and immediately deserts the site, and if a fire warning was not given, B had a risk of spreading the structure used as a residence, etc., if the fire warning was not given, the Defendant's act of attaching a fire to the friendly machine will start its execution with the intention to prevent the present structure and fire. Therefore, the lower court erred by misapprehending the fact and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment, on the premise that the Defendant did not have the intention to prevent the present structure.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court regarding the Defendant’s claim of mental disability, the lower court is deemed to have received mental treatment after the Defendant committed the instant crime, such as decentralization, fluoral disease, alcohol dependence, etc., but did not have the ability to discern things or make decisions at the time of committing the instant crime in light of the content of the instant crime, the circumstances leading to the instant crime, the method of committing the crime, and the circumstances before and after the instant crime.

It does not seem that there was or was a weak state.

This part of the defendant's assertion is without merit.

B. Judgment on the prosecutor’s assertion of mistake of facts

유사 판례

-서울고등법원 2013.09.12 2013노1328

-서울서부지방법원 2013.12.12 2013노1063

-서울남부지방법원 2019.01.17 2018노1508

-대전지방법원 2015.01.29 2014노3290

-서울고등법원 2020.02.06 2019노1918