logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구고등법원 2014.09.25 2014노405
일반자동차방화등
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. At the time of each of the instant crimes, the Defendant was in a state of mental disability due to mental retardation and drinking.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the claim of mental disability, the defendant, as the disabled of the third degree with intellectual disability, is recognized as having a drinking immediately before the crime of this case.

However, in full view of the circumstances revealed by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court and the lower court, the method and method of each of the instant crimes, the Defendant’s act before and after the commission of the crime, and the Defendant’s attitude in the trial court, etc., it does not seem that the Defendant did not seem to have had the ability to discern things or make decisions at the time of each of the instant crimes due to such intellectual disability or drinking.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion cannot be accepted.

B. As to the assertion on unfair sentencing, there are extenuating circumstances, such as the fact that the defendant is a disabled person of Grade III with intellectual disability, the defendant shows an attitude of recognizing and opposing his mistake, and the value of the thief crime was minor, and the victim expressed his/her intent that the damaged product is returned to the victim and the victim does not want the punishment of the defendant.

However, the crime of fire prevention of this case was committed without any particular reason on the part of the other person, and it is highly dangerous in society. The defendant was punished for attempted fire prevention of the present building, general automobile fire prevention, etc. even before each of the crimes of this case was committed, but again committed the crime of fire prevention of this case.

In addition, the fire prevention crime of this case did not recover properly.

The conditions of sentencing, such as the age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of each of the instant crimes, and the circumstances after the crime.

arrow