(영문) 서울고등법원 2016.08.31 2016노1919 | 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) 서울고등법원 2016.08.31 2016노1919

강도상해등

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine, which did not recognize the Defendant’s mental and physical weakness, despite the lack of the ability to discern things or make decisions by administering phiphones at the time when the Defendant committed the crime of attempted special larceny and robbery as indicated in the lower judgment.

B. The punishment sentenced by the court below against the defendant (the imprisonment of three years and six months, the additional collection of 780,000 won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the Defendant’s assertion of misapprehension of the legal doctrine as to the assertion of misapprehension of the legal doctrine, the lower court rejected the Defendant’s assertion on the following grounds: (a) on the grounds that the lower court stated detailed circumstances at the level of 6, 8, and 7, 11, the said judgment.

In addition to the circumstances acknowledged by the lower court, the Defendant administered a philophone on December 5, 2015 at approximately 0.03g at around 18:00, and the Defendant committed a special larceny attempted crime in the judgment around December 6, 2015, which was seven hours after the administration date, and around 12 hours after the commission date, committed a robbery crime in the judgment around December 6, 2015. The Defendant committed a robbery crime in the judgment around 06:19 on December 6, 2015, which was around 12 hours after the commission date. The philophone was a kind of each sex, and the Defendant was under a mental and physical weakness at the time of each of the above crimes.

Examining the fact that it is difficult to see, in comparison with the evidence duly adopted and examined, the judgment of the court below is just.

Therefore, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as asserted by the defendant.

subsection (b) of this section.

B. The Defendant is against his or her wrong recognition of his or her wrong determination on sentencing.

With the agreement with the victims, the victims have not been subject to criminal punishment against the defendant.

There are children to be supported by the defendant.

These circumstances can be considered in light of the circumstances favorable to the defendant.

On the other hand, however,

유사 판례

-창원지방법원 2017.12.13 2017노2053

-수원지방법원 2016.04.01 2015노3519

-대전고등법원 2018.05.18 2017노511

-서울고등법원 2018.02.07 2017노3326

-광주고등법원 (전주) 2016.05.24 2016노37