logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2017.10.25 2017고단3152
폭력행위등처벌에관한법률위반(우범자)
Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

After the Defendant in the factory room, he gird with C, while coming to death with C, found C’s her husband’s residence, and found C’s her his her son’s residence on May 18, 2017 at around 16:40 on May 18, 2017, while the Defendant in the factory room was in possession of a kitchen, which is a deadly weapon, (33cm in total length, 21cm in length).

As a result, the defendant carried dangerous objects that are likely to be used for crimes under the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act without justifiable grounds.

Judgment

Article 7 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act applicable to the facts charged in the instant case provides or arranges the carrying of lethal weapons or other dangerous articles that are likely to be commonly used for a crime prescribed in this Act without justifiable grounds, shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for not more than three years, or by a fine not exceeding three million won.

“.......”

Meanwhile, the above Act was amended by Act No. 13718, Jan. 6, 2016; several Articles 2(2) and 2(3) and 3(4) stipulate the following: (a) the amount of violent crimes committed by more than two persons; (b) the amount of repeated crime committed by an organization, etc. under Article 4; (c) the organization of an organization, etc. under Article 5; and (d) the offense committed by a judicial police officer under Article 9.

The evidence alone submitted by the prosecutor is likely to commit a crime prescribed by the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, such as a crime of joint violence or a crime of repeated offense, with the evidence of two or more defendants.

Since it is insufficient to see that the kitchen blades written in the facts charged constitute a deadly weapon or other dangerous article which is likely to be used for the crime as prescribed in the above law, there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Thus, the facts charged in this case constitute a case where there is no proof of crime, and thus, a judgment of not guilty by the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

arrow