(영문) 수원지방법원 2014.03.13 2013노5872 | 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) 수원지방법원 2014.03.13 2013노5872

절도

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The court below recognized the habituality of the crime of this case by misapprehending the legal principles, even though it is difficult to see that the crime of this case was committed by the defendant, which affected the conclusion of the judgment by misapprehending the legal principles on habituality.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one year, six months of imprisonment, and confiscation) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Habituality of a crime to be judged as to the assertion of misapprehension of the legal doctrine refers to a brush of a criminal and a tendency of a crime, which does not constitute the essence of the act, and refers to the character that constitutes the characteristics of the offender. Therefore, whether habituality exists shall be determined by comprehensively taking into account various circumstances, such as the offender’s age, character, occupation, environment, transfer, motive, means, method and place of the crime, interval with the previous crime, and similarity with the contents of the crime.

(2) The Defendant’s crime of this case was committed on August 201, 2006, with a view to the following facts: (a) the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for larceny, etc. at the Suwon District Court on August 20, 2001; (b) the Defendant committed the crime of this case repeatedly over 10 times within a relatively short period of time; and (c) the Defendant committed the crime of this case with a view to selling computer parts, etc. as a customer with a computer, and by taking the body of the computer or monitor, etc. into care, and brought about the parts of this case, or brought about a computer and monitor, etc.; and (d) the Defendant’s motive, means, method, and place of the crime of this case was completely similar to that of the Defendant’s theft. In full view of the aforementioned circumstances, the Defendant’s assertion on this part of the crime of this case is without merit.

B. Unreasonable sentencing.

참조판례

-대법원 2006. 5. 11. 선고 2004도6176 판결

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 2013.08.29 2013노3150

-대전지방법원 2015.11.05 2015노2782

-수원지방법원 2014.08.22 2014노3229

-서울중앙지방법원 2013.01.03 2012노3797

-부산지방법원 2013.11.28 2013노2764