logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 2020.4.29.선고 2020도2371 판결
가.증거인멸교사·나.증거은닉교사·다.증거인멸·라.증거은닉
Cases

2020Do2371(a)

(b) A evidence concealment teacher;

(c) Destruction;

(d) Concealment of evidence;

Defendant

1.(a)(b)

A

2. (c)

B

3.(c) ;

C

Appellant

Defendants

Defense Counsel

Law Firm LLC (For the defendant A and C)

Attorney Kim Noise-hee, Counsel for the plaintiff

Attorney Park Jong-young (for the defendant A)

Attorney Lee Im-soo (Presiding Justice for Defendant B)

Judgment of the lower court

Seoul Central District Court Decision 2019 2665 Decided January 31, 2020

Imposition of Judgment

April 29, 2020

Text

All appeals shall be dismissed.

Reasons

The grounds for appeal are determined.

1. As to the grounds of final appeal by Defendant A and C, the lower court upheld the first instance judgment convicting Defendant A and C of the facts charged (excluding the part not guilty) on the grounds as indicated in its holding. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the relevant legal doctrine and the evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the crime of destroying evidence, concealing evidence, aiding and abetting evidence, destroying evidence, and concealing evidence, or distinguishing between the co-principal and the co-principal.

2. As to the grounds of appeal by Defendant B, the allegation that the judgment of the original court erred by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against the facts prior to sentencing constitutes an unfair judgment. However, according to Article 383 Subparag. 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor for not less than ten years is imposed, an appeal for the reason of unfair sentencing is allowed. Thus, in this case where Defendant B was rendered with respect to a minor sentence, the allegation that the sentence of punishment is unfair does not constitute a legitimate ground of appeal.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Park Jae-young

Justices Min You-sook

Justices Kim Jae-hyung

Justices Lee Dong-won

Jeju High Court Decision 205No10

arrow