logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2018.05.17 2017노1539
절도등
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant, by misunderstanding the fact, took out a loan from the injured party, and did not steals it.

The statements of the victim, which served as the basis of conviction in the judgment of the court below, are not reliable.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (one million won in penalty) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The intent of infringing on the ownership or principal right in a case where the property of another person is used without the consent of the possessor in a case where the property of another person is used without permission, and where the property was disposed of at other place than the original place, or the property is occupied for the long

In light of the above legal principles, the intent of unlawful acquisition may be recognized (see Supreme Court Decision 2005Do7819, Mar. 9, 2006). In light of the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, the Defendant committed a theft of another’s property with the intent of unlawful acquisition by neglecting to prevent the victim from being aware of his/her whereabouts, without the consent of the victim.

It is reasonable to see that it is reasonable.

Defendant’s assertion is not accepted.

The victim, immediately before committing the theft of this case, was aware that the Defendant drinking alcohol at the drinking house operated by D with the Defendant, D, etc., and that the Defendant was booming off the Otoba and collected it. However, the victim stated that the key was flicked from the Defendant and blicked on the table, and that the key was flicked and blicked.

In addition, even though the defendant requested the return to the defendant several times, there is no continuous contact, such as the defendant's blocking the receipt of his own phone, etc., for about two days, the defendant received the text message from the defendant that the luminous ionization of the Madsan is in the Madblidine, and he directly go to the above place.

arrow