(영문) 춘천지방법원 2016.11.30 2016노635 | 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) 춘천지방법원 2016.11.30 2016노635

마약류관리에관한법률위반(향정)등

Text

The judgment below

Part concerning the crime of Nos. 2 through 5 of the judgment shall be reversed.

As to the crime of 2 to 5 of the judgment of the defendant.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) Defendant 1 did not assault or threaten the victim C and D at the time and place specified in the facts constituting the crime of the lower judgment, and the victim D delivered KRW 30 million to the Defendant under the pretext of consolation money for divorce between the Defendant and the victim C. As such, the victim D related to the crime of the lower judgment cannot be deemed to have been forced merely because the victim D voluntarily responded to the reasons for giving money. 2) The lower court’s sentence of unfair sentencing (a fine of KRW 500,00,000,000,000,000 won) is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court is too unhued and unreasonable.

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

A. The lower court did not confiscate two assistants (No. 3, 2015. Modern Branch Office of the Chuncheon District Prosecutors' Office No. 366, No. 2015. 3) that were seized from the Defendant, but according to each of the records of seizure, investigation report (emergency search and seizure grounds, such as injection from the suspect A), and the report of appraisal request about two assistants, the above assistants are deemed to have been used for the administration of philopon as stated in the main sentence of Article 67 of the Narcotics Control Act. Thus, the above two assistants are deemed to have been used for the administration of philopon as stated in Article 5

Nevertheless, the lower court did not confiscate the two above-mentioned parts concerning the crime Nos. 2 through 5 as to the above-mentioned crimes.

B. The lower court did not render an examination of evidence and investigation on the evidence while submitting evidence on the crime of conflict and coercion as stated in paragraphs 3 and 4 of the judgment of the Defendant.

C. As such, the part concerning the crime of Articles 2 through 5 of the judgment of the court below is erroneous and adversely affected the conclusion of the judgment, this part cannot be maintained any longer.

However, the defendant's assertion of mistake is still subject to the judgment of this court.

3. As to the part of the judgment of the court below regarding the second to fifth of the crimes.

참조조문

-마약류 관리에 관한 법률 제67조

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 2019.01.22 2017노281

-대구지방법원 2014.05.01 2013노4153

-광주지방법원 2014.04.02 2014노141

-광주지방법원 2019.09.05 2019노256

-광주지방법원 2015.10.13 2015노723