logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2015.12.04 2015노1987
살인
Text

All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

Reasons

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

The sentencing of the lower court is too unreasonable because it is too unreasonable to keep the sentence.

(1) On the contrary, the above sentencing is too unfortunate and unfair.

(2) In light of the degree of responsibility for the crime and the purpose of punishment, the death penalty should be granted only when there is an objective circumstance that can be justified in light of the degree of responsibility for the crime and the purpose of punishment.

Therefore, in sentencing death penalty, the decision on whether to choose the death penalty shall be made after thoroughly examining all the matters that are the conditions for sentencing, such as the offender's age, occupation and career, character and behavior, intelligence, education degree, growth process, family relation, existence of criminal record, motive for the crime, existence of prior plan, the degree of preparation, means and method, remaining and malicious degree, seriousness of the result, number of victims and damage appraisal, the depth and attitude of the result, reflectivity and attitude after the crime, the degree of reflectment, the possibility of recidivism, etc., focusing on the matters stipulated in Article 51 of the Criminal Act, and clearly stating the above special circumstances.

In order to do so, the court should consider only the sentencing conditions indicated in the records in a flat size, and further, should secure objective data to examine the character, conduct, environment, intelligence, risk of recidivism, possibility of improvement and edification, which are the subjective elements of the defendant's subjective sentencing, and then examine whether to choose the death penalty through this. In addition, even though the defendant decided to commit a crime, prepared to prepare for the crime, and changed the defendant's mental state or psychological state before and after the commission of the crime, he should hear the expert opinions in the relevant fields, such as mental medicine or psychology.

arrow