(영문) 서울고등법원 2015.04.10 2015노335 | 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 2015.04.10 2015노335

특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(절도)등

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for three years.

The keys to the seized vehicle (a certification number C).

Reasons

1. The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (three years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. We examine ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal for ex officio determination.

In the first instance of the trial, the prosecutor applied for the amendment of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes to change the name of the criminal defendant with regard to the larceny of this case from "violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes" to "Habitual Larceny" and "Article 5-4 (6) and (1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes" and "Article 329 of the Criminal Act", and the court has permitted it to change the subject of judgment

Therefore, the judgment of the court below that sentenced the defendant to one punishment by regarding the thief and other crimes of this case as concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act can no longer be maintained.

3. Therefore, the judgment of the court below is reversed without examining the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing, and the judgment below is reversed, and it is again decided as follows.

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts constituting a crime and the summary of the evidence acknowledged by this court is as follows: (a) the facts constituting a crime of paragraph (2) of the judgment of the court below are as follows: (b) the latter part of paragraph (2) is as “Habitual larceny” from “violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Larceny)” to “2. and the latter part of paragraph (2) is as follows: (c) and (d) is as follows: (a) the Defendant was sentenced twice or more to a crime of habitual larceny; and (b) again stolens the victims’ property within three years after the execution of the sentence was completed; and (b) it is identical to each corresponding column of the judgment of the court below, since it

Application of Statutes

1. Article 360 of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts and the choice of punishment

참조조문

-특정범죄 가중처벌 등에 관한 법률

-특정범죄 가중처벌 등에 관한 법률 제5조의4 제6항

유사 판례

-전주지방법원 2015.05.22 2014노1503

-서울고등법원 2015.05.01 2015노527

-의정부지방법원 2015.05.27 2015노648

-인천지방법원 2015.06.12 2015재노20 (1)

-서울중앙지방법원 2015.06.11 2015노1702