logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2015.1.6.선고 2014고합580 판결
현주건조물방화치상
Cases

2014 Highly Injury or injury caused by fire to the main building of 580

Defendant

A

Prosecutor

Kim Jong-tae (prosecution) and leapment (Trial)

Defense Counsel

Attorney B (Korean National Assembly)

Imposition of Judgment

January 6, 2015

Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than two years and six months.

except that the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for four years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

Reasons

Criminal facts

On July 7, 2014, around 12:30 on July 12:30, 2014, the Defendant, while under the influence of alcohol in his/her and his/her family's residence 3:06 of the 3rd floor of the 3rd floor of the 3rd floor of the 3rd floor of the 3rd floor of the 3rd floor of the 3rd floor of the 306th century,

Accordingly, the Defendant: (a) destroyed the entire inside of the above housing No. 306 and destroyed the said housing No. 305 of the victim D (e.g., 57 years old) by continuously extinguishing the fire and continuously extinguishing the fire to the victim D (e.g., 57 years old) by putting the blick in the clothes, etc. on the entrance side of the entrance of the entrance of the entrance, and attaching the fire to the building by placing it on the wall.

Therefore, the Defendant destroyed the victim D’s house to take an internal repair cost of KRW 4 million due to the fire extinguishment of the above fire, etc., and caused property damage to the victim E (the age of 72) residing in 206 of the same house to the extent that the market internal repair cost is sufficient, and caused property damage to the victim FF (the age of 55) residing in 106 of the same house with the market value of KRW 7,545,500, and caused property damage to the victim F (the age of 55) residing in 106 of the same house with the inside repair cost of KRW 7,545,500 for about a week medical treatment to the above D.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police statement made to D, F, and E;

1. A medical certificate;

1. Requests for appraisal;

1. The date of the investigation report, each investigation report (in relation to attachment of a photographic photo, attachment to the 119-dong Order and the 112-Report Handling Department), the de facto investigation report, and the results of the investigation on the fire site:

[The defendant and his defense counsel asserted that the injury to the victim D is minor and thus does not constitute the injury prescribed in the crime of injury caused by the present building. However, according to the evidence adopted and examined by the court, the victim D received hospitalized treatment for 4 days due to the injury caused by the smoke of fire, and the above degree of injury is extremely minor and so it cannot be seen that the defendant and his defense counsel's assertion is not acceptable).

1. Article relevant to the facts constituting an offense and the selection of punishment;

Article 164(2) first sentence and Article 164(1) of the Criminal Act (Selection of Imprisonment with prison labor for a limited term)

1. Discretionary mitigation;

Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act (The following consideration for the reasons for sentencing):

1. Suspension of execution;

Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (The following grounds for sentencing has been repeatedly taken into consideration for favorable circumstances)

Reasons for sentencing

[Scope of Punishment] Imprisonment of two years and six months to fifteen years;

[Determination of Punishment] Injury resulting from fire such as a fire crime, a structure of a suspender, etc.; injury resulting from fire such as the first type (the injury resulting from fire such as a modern building, etc.) (the person with a special punishment); minor injury; non-conformity with punishment (each element

【General Escopics] Efforts to prevent the spread of fire, other damage, and the Defendant also suffers serious injury due to fire, serious anti-inscopic factors (each mitigated element).

[Extent of Recommendation] One year to five years (at least two special mitigation areas, and at least two special mitigation persons) from one year and three months from one year and three months from one year to five years, and the minimum limit of sentence recommended in the sentencing guidelines shall be mitigated to 1/2)

[Scope of the revised Recommendations] Imprisonment of two years and six months to five years (which shall be in accordance with the corresponding sentence)

[Reasons for Suspension of Execution] In the event that a defendant suffers a serious injury due to a failure to punish, minor injury (a positive reason for suspension of execution), an effort to prevent extinguishment of fire or other spread of damage, or a fire prevention, a contingent crime, a serious reflectivity, or a criminal record of suspension of execution or more (a positive reason for suspension of execution)

[Decision of Sentence] Two years and six months of imprisonment, and four years of suspended execution, are cases where the defendant destroyed the inside of his/her residence and destroyed the inside and inflicted an injury with property damage on several victims living in the same house. Considering that the defendant's crime is a serious criminal causing damage to the majority body and property, it is inevitable to punish the defendant corresponding to this.

However, the punishment shall be determined as ordered in consideration of all the sentencing conditions specified in the pleadings of the instant case, including the fact that the Defendant recognized his mistake and reflects, that the Defendant voluntarily reported to 119, etc., appears to have made efforts to prevent extinguishment and the spread of damage, that the degree of injury of the victim D is not severe, that the victims are the Defendant’s wife, that the Defendant also suffered serious injury due to the fire prevention of the instant case, that the Defendant did not have any record of punishment for the same kind of crime, that there was no criminal record of imprisonment without prison labor or heavier punishment, and that there was no criminal record of the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, and circumstances after the crime, etc., but the execution of the punishment shall

Judges

The new judge, new judge and new judge

Judge To call

Judges Il-il

arrow