logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2014.11.27 2014노2453
특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(절도)등
Text

In the judgment of the first instance court, "the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes against the Victim J" is considered to be a larceny.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Of the facts charged in this case of mistake of facts, the judgment of the court of first instance that acquitted the victim F of this part of the charges is erroneous in misunderstanding of facts, in view of all the evidence such as F’s statement, even though it is possible to find the defendant guilty of this part of the charges.

B. As to the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes against the Victim J among the facts charged in the instant case, the judgment of the court of first instance that acquitted the victim of this part of the facts charged is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles, although the possession of the lost owner of goods or the possession of the manager of the cash payment period can be recognized in the case of goods left in the bank-

C. The first sentence of an unreasonable sentencing (one year and six months of imprisonment, confiscation) is too uneasible and unfair.

2. Before the judgment on the grounds for appeal ex officio, the case is examined ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal, and the prosecutor first among the crimes stated in the column of “Article 360(1) of the Criminal Act” while maintaining the facts charged as to the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes against Victims F against the victim F for the first time in the court.

A. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance, which added the part of the embezzlement of stolen goods to the ancillary charge, is subject to the judgment by this court. Therefore, the guilty part among the judgment of the court of first instance, which is the concurrent crime under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, cannot be maintained.

There are such reasons for ex officio reversal in the judgment of the first instance.

Even if the prosecutor's argument of mistake or misunderstanding of legal principles is still subject to the judgment of this court.

arrow