(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2013.11.07 2013노3121

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) 서울중앙지방법원 2013.11.07 2013노3121

특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(절도)

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The crime of this case by misapprehending the legal principles is merely due to the defendant's difficulty in living, and it cannot be deemed that the defendant's habituality has been realized.

Nevertheless, the court below found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case. The court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination:

A. As to the assertion of misapprehension of legal principles, habitualness refers to the habit of repeated larceny, and the existence of criminal records in the same kind of crime and the frequency, period, motive and method of the crime in the same case shall be determined by comprehensively taking into account the existence of such criminal records and the frequency, period, means and methods, etc.

(2) According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, the following facts are acknowledged: (a) the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for larceny, etc. at the Seoul Eastern District Court on May 4, 2010; (b) the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for ten months at the Seoul Central District Court on July 13, 2011; and (c) the details and methods of the past punishment are the same as those of the instant thiefs; (c) the Defendant committed the instant thiefs; (d) the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for ten months at the Seoul Central District Court on July 13, 201; and (e) the Defendant committed the instant thiefs; and (e) the Defendant was found to have committed the instant thiefs by taking account of the following facts: (e) the Defendant committed the instant thiefs in a short period of time after being released from the subway at night; and (e) the Defendant committed the instant thiefs.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is not erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles as to habitual larceny, and this part of the defendant's assertion is without merit.

B. As to the assertion of unfair sentencing, the damaged goods have been considerably temporarily returned, and the defendant has agreed with the victim C.

참조판례

-대법원 2009. 2. 12. 선고 2008도11550 판결

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2013.05.16 2013노1108

-인천지방법원 2014.10.22 2014노2099

-서울동부지방법원 2013.04.11 2013노51

-서울중앙지방법원 2013.11.29 2013노3531

-청주지방법원 2014.10.31 2014노915