logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구고등법원 2015.06.18 2015노174
강도상해등
Text

1. The part of the judgment of the court below against the defendant is reversed.

2. The defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for seven years;

3. A seizure.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (seven years of imprisonment) by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. We examine ex officio the defendant's grounds for appeal prior to judgment on the grounds for appeal.

The prosecutor applied for the amendment of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes to the effect that the name of the defendant was changed to the name of the crime "Habitual larceny" among the name of the defendant in the trial of the party. However, in light of the facts charged and the amended applicable provisions of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, this is deemed to be a clerical error in the facts charged in the case and the amended applicable provisions of the Act, and thus, it is corrected as above." Article 5-4 (6) and (1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes among applicable provisions of the Act apply for the amendment of the indictment to the effect that Article 32

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's grounds of appeal on the grounds of ex officio reversal, and the judgment below is reversed and it is again decided as follows.

【The reasoning of the judgment of the court below that found the facts constituting a crime and the summary of the evidence admitted by the court below, and the summary of the facts constituting a crime and the summary of the evidence, except that the court below ruled that the "violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes" under Article 1-1 (a) of the second facts constituting a crime shall be deemed to be "Habitual special larceny", and that the court below held that "this defendant was sentenced to imprisonment not less than two times for a crime under Article 5-4 (1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, and subsequently attempted to steal or steals the victims' property again within three years after the execution of the sentence was completed," and that "the defendant committed a theft or attempted to steals the victims' property."

arrow