Whether it is unlawful to impose an illegal sentence on a juvenile in the event of death penalty or life imprisonment as a statutory penalty.

In order to sentence an irregular sentence for a juvenile, it is obvious that the juvenile should be a case where the juvenile commits a crime corresponding to a limited term of two or more years under Article 54 (1) of the Juvenile Act. Therefore, in a case where death penalty or imprisonment for life is prescribed as a statutory penalty, even if there is a multiple-choice penalty for such crime, the punishment for an irregular term may not be sentenced for the juvenile who commits the crime even if there is a limited term of two or more

Article 54 of the Juvenile Act

Supreme Court Decision 66Do1731 Decided January 31, 1967 (Supreme Court Decision 3631, Supreme Court Decision 15Nu17, Decision 54(4) of the Juvenile Act, Decision 1513

Defendant

Defendant

Seoul District Court (65Da9725)

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

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

One hundred and forty days of detention days prior to the pronouncement of the original judgment shall be included in the original sentence.

The gist of the grounds of appeal for the defendant and the defendant's defense counsel (Korean government-appointed attorney Kim Jong-chul) is that the court below erred in the misapprehension of the facts charged against the defendant, and thus, the court below erred in the misapprehension of facts.

Therefore, in light of the fact that the witness Nonindicted 1’s statement and the first (Evidence No. 1) seized by the court below duly admitted by the court below was comprehensively examined, and each of the statements made by the witness, Nonindicted 1, and Nonindicted 2 in the party process is sufficient to recognize the criminal facts of the defendant at the time of the original trial, and there is no other evidence to believe that the court below erred in the facts like the theory of lawsuit.

In this context, according to the original judgment, it is clear that the court below recognized the facts charged of the injury by robbery against the defendant and sentenced the defendant who is a juvenile to a short term of three years and four years of imprisonment for a short term after applying Article 337 of the Criminal Act. However, in order to sentence a juvenile to a short term of two years or more, it is obvious under Article 54(1) of the Juvenile Act that the juvenile has committed an offense corresponding to a limited term of two years or more, and therefore, if a death penalty or life penalty is prescribed as a statutory penalty, it is reasonable to interpret that even if there is a limited term of two years or more, it cannot be sentenced to an illegal term punishment for the juvenile who committed the crime, even if it is a limited term of two years or more, it shall be interpreted that the court below recognized the facts charged as a statutory punishment for the defendant's criminal offense, which is a juvenile, and sentenced as seen above by the rate of Article 337 of the Criminal Act, which is a life imprisonment for the defendant, and therefore, should be reversed by the court below's decision that it should be reversed as follows.

(Criminal Facts)

The criminal facts against the defendant recognized by the principal court are the same as those at the time of the original trial, and they are quoted by Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

(Evidence Relationship)

The facts of the judgment

1. Each part of the statements that correspond to the facts in the trial process of the witness Non-Indicted 1 and 2

1. Among the trial records of the court below, the part of the statement that corresponds to the facts in the judgment of the court below by non-indicted 1

1. The existence of one (No. 1) above, which has been seized;

Since the facts of the judgment can be recognized by taking into account the facts are sufficient to prove.

(Application of Law)

The so-called judgment of the defendant falls under Article 337 of the Criminal Act, and it is recognized that there is a reason to take into account the circumstances such as the fact that the defendant is still a young juvenile. Thus, Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act shall be punished by imprisonment for up to three years and six months, and 140 days out of the number of detention days before the judgment of the court below is applied by Article 57 of the Criminal Act shall be inserted into the above sentence for the defendant.

It is so decided as per Disposition with the same reasons as above.

Judges Jeong Tae-won (Presiding Judge)