logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 전주지방법원 2016.07.22 2016노596
특수절도등
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) of the lower court’s punishment (two years and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The determination that the Defendant recognized the instant crime and responded to the mistake, arrested the Defendant, and revealed and actively cooperated in the investigation by itself, 880,000 won out of the amount of damage was returned to Q Q, and that the Defendant again did not commit a crime.

It is hard to say that it is favorable to the defendant.

On the other hand, the crime of this case was committed by the defendant after destroying the door of a religious facility or a house or invaded into a drick door, and thus, it is not good to the quality of the crime in light of the method and frequency of the crime, etc. of theft of property amounting to about 15 million won in total 24 times, and there was a record of criminal punishment for the same crime even before the defendant. On September 30, 2010, the Gwangju District Court sentenced the defendant to imprisonment for a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (thief) at the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (thief) on February 2, 2014 and was sentenced to imprisonment for three years and six months at the Gwangju District Court sentenced on September 30, 201, and committed the crime of this case without care during the period of repeated crime, and it was difficult to expect the recovery of damage in the future.

In full view of the above circumstances and other factors of sentencing, including the background of the instant crime, the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, and environment, etc., the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable as it is too unreasonable, and thus, the Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow