(영문) 대구고등법원 2014.01.23 2013노411 | 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) 대구고등법원 2014.01.23 2013노411

특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(절도)

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant of mistake of facts, at around 20:0 on March 20, 2013, at the time of committing the crime described in Article 2-b(b) of the judgment of the court below, only stolen the items listed in Article 2-c(c) of the judgment of the court below, and separately, did not commit larceny as stated in Article 2-c(c) of the judgment of the court below at around March 21, 2013.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty as to the facts charged under subparagraph 2(c) of the judgment of the court below is erroneous or erroneous, thereby adversely affecting the judgment.

B. At the time of each of the instant crimes, the Defendant was in a state of having no capacity to discern things or make decisions due to mental disorders.

C. The sentence of unfair sentencing (two years of imprisonment) by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court regarding the assertion of mistake of facts, the fact that the Defendant intruded into the “E” office operated by the victim on March 21, 2013, as stated in paragraph (3) of Article 2 of the lower judgment, and stolen food, cosmetics, etc. is recognized.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below to the same purport is just and acceptable, and there is no error of misconception of facts alleged by the defendant.

B. According to the judgment of the court below and the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of mental disorder, the fact that the defendant was suffering from mental disorder such as "other habits and impulse disorder" at the time of the crime of this case is recognized.

However, in light of the circumstances such as the background leading up to the instant crime, the means and method of the crime, the Defendant’s behavior before and after the instant crime, etc., the Defendant appears to have reached a situation where the mental disorder at the time of each of the instant larceny did not lack the ability to discern things or make decisions, and thus, the Defendant’s assertion above is difficult.

유사 판례

-부산고등법원 2017.06.22 2017노206

-수원지방법원 2015.02.12 2014노7457

-서울북부지방법원 2014.11.27 2014노1048

-춘천지방법원 강릉지원 2013.02.19 2012노387

-대구고등법원 2014.01.09 2013노345