(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2014.10.16 2014노598 (1)

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) 서울북부지방법원 2014.10.16 2014노598 (1)

횡령

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of two million won.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable that the penalty (two million won of a fine) imposed by the court below against the defendant is too unreasonable.

2. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below ex officio, the defendant was sentenced to an order to attend a compliance officer training for two years and forty hours in the period of suspension of execution in August 26, 2013 at the Seoul Central District Court on July 26, 2013, and the judgment became final and conclusive on August 3, 2013. Thus, the crime for which the judgment became final and conclusive and the crime of conflict in this case are concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and are determined by the court below after examining whether to reduce or exempt punishment in consideration of equity and the case of concurrent crimes under Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act. In this regard, the judgment below cannot be maintained any longer.

3. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing, and the judgment below is again decided as follows after oral argument.

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts charged and the evidence admitted by this court is as follows. The first head of the facts charged in the judgment of the court below added "the defendant was ordered by the Seoul Central District Court on July 26, 2013 to attend a law-abiding lecture for two years and forty hours after suspension of execution of imprisonment in August 26, 2013 and that the judgment became final and conclusive on August 3, 2013" to "1. A previous conviction in the judgment of the court below was the same as each corresponding column of the judgment of the court below, except for adding "a criminal record inquiry" to the summary of the evidence. Thus, it is cited as it is in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Article 350 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts, the choice of a fine, and the choice of a fine;

1. The latter part of Article 37 and Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act dealing with concurrent crimes

참조조문

유사 판례

-서울남부지방법원 2015.12.10 2015노1445

-인천지방법원 2013.07.22 2013고정895

-부산지방법원 2015.06.18 2015노971

-인천지방법원 2013.03.11 2012고정5233

-서울남부지방법원 2015.05.01 2014노1829