beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Regarding the charge of confinement of each of the crimes in this case by mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, the Defendant, based on the free will of the victim from around 11:00 on December 18, 2014 to around 11:00 of the same month from around 24 hours after the following day, was staying together with the victim inside and outside the telecom for about 19:0 of the same month, and there was no fact that the Defendant had detained the victim as stated in the facts charged (in the above period, the Defendant got out of the telecom with the victim and boomed with the victim during the above period, the Defendant was able to report the crime to the investigation agency or request a third party to help the victim), and there was an error of law by misunderstanding the fact that the lower court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged, or by misunderstanding the legal principles on the crime of confinement, which affected the conclusion
B. The Defendant, at the time of committing the instant crime, was under the influence of alcohol and was in a state of mental disability, so punishment should be mitigated.
C. The sentence imposed by the lower court (three years of imprisonment, etc.) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. The crime of confinement 1 on the assertion of mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles is a crime which makes it impossible or extremely difficult for a person to move into a specific area with the freedom of action as the protected legal interest of the person, and thus makes it impossible or extremely difficult for the person to move into the specific area, not only physical and tangible obstacles, but also psychological and intangible obstacles, and the essence of confinement is limited to the means and methods that restrict the freedom of action by restricting the freedom of action. Therefore, the means and methods are either tangible or intangible, nor are it unnecessary to deprive the person of the freedom of action in confinement.