(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.11.17 2017노2920

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 2017.11.17 2017노2920

절도

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant is not guilty, and the summary of the judgment of innocence is publicly notified.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The fact-finding victim not only allowed the defendant to bring about approximately 200 Kamera films (hereinafter “victims”) but also did not allow the defendant to bring about about about about about about 200 goods (hereinafter “victims”).

3) Defendant’s consent

Since the goods of this case were taken by mistake, there was no intention to commit theft.

B. The punishment of the lower court is too heavy.

2. Summary of the facts charged and the judgment of the court below

A. On March 15, 2017, the Defendant, at around 17:30 on March 15, 2017, stolen the damaged goods stored in “C” in Gangnam-gu Seoul, by bringing the damaged goods stored in “C” to the injured party.

B. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged based on the duly adopted evidence.

3. Determination of the party deliberation (as to the assertion of mistake of facts)

A. The finding of conviction of a legal doctrine ought to be based on evidence with probative value, which leads a judge to have the conviction that the facts charged are true beyond a reasonable doubt. Therefore, if there is no such evidence, even if there is doubt of guilt against the defendant, it is inevitable to determine the interest of the defendant, and the same applies to the recognition of the criminal intent, which is a subjective element of fraud (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2015Do2255, Jul. 23, 2015). (b) The following facts are acknowledged according to the evidence adopted by the lower court and the first instance court and the evidence examined by the lower court.

1) At the introduction of F, the Defendant, who is engaged in the instant entertainment business, visited the victim, who is the photographer, with the knowledge of the victim, and visited the victim and F several times on several occasions.

2) In early 2017, the Defendant discovered damaged goods separately stored in transparent shopping bags after the use by the victim, and whether the victim may want to use the goods for the test.

“The victim was the body of the Defendant, and the victim was the relationship entertainment with the Defendant.

참조판례

-대법원 2015. 7. 23. 선고 2015도2255 판결

유사 판례

-광주지방법원 2018.05.17 2017노3368

-광주지방법원 순천지원 2017.02.13 2016고정560

-서울북부지방법원 2018.09.18 2018노1321

-광주지방법원 2018.05.03 2017노1991

-창원지방법원 2018.07.04 2017노3359