2017Gohap586, 640 (Joint), 711(Joint)

Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (Habitual Special Intimidation), violence, etc.

Violation of the Punishment Act (Habitual Violence) and the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act

Violations (Habitual Destruction, etc. of Property) and Violation of the Punishment of Minor Offenses Act

A

Doctrine (prosecution) and Kim Woo (Public trial)

Attorney B (Korean National Assembly)

August 17, 2017

Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for a year and six months, and a fine of KRW 500,00.

When the defendant fails to pay the above fine, the defendant shall be confined in the old house for the period calculated by converting 100,000 won into one day.

Criminal facts

【Criminal Power】

On August 30, 2012, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment for one year and six months with prison labor for a violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a collective, deadly weapon, etc.) at the Seoul Central District Court, and on April 19, 2013, the same court was sentenced to eight months for a violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a collective, deadly weapon, etc.) and completed the execution of the sentence on August 22, 2014. On March 26, 2015, the Defendant was sentenced to one year for an injury, etc. at the Seoul East District Court and completed the execution of the sentence on February 10, 2016. On March 10, 2017, the Defendant was sentenced to seven months of imprisonment with prison labor for a violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a repeated assault) at the Seoul Central District Court on March 11, 2017.

"2017Gohap586"

1. Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act;

On May 27, 2017, at around 15:45, the Defendant expressed that the victim D (the age of 71) who operates the sobnish store in front of the Seoul Jung-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government would not give coffees, and that the victim D (the age of 71) would be satis dyke, "Sat dyke sat sat sat sat sat sat sat sat sat sat sat sat sat sat sat sat sat sat sat sat sat sat sat sat."

2. Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (Habitual special intimidation);

After the Defendant assaulted the victim as stated in paragraph (1) above, the Defendant, by driving a string-down jum (a 11.5cm, 11cm in length, 6cm in thickness) where the victim was placed on the floor of the damaged person who escaped, and by carrying a dangerous object, the Defendant threatened the victim by carrying a string-down jum in a canter.”

"2017 Gohap640"

On May 25, 2017, the Defendant: (a) around 17:40 on May 25, 2017, in order to operate a business on the front of the F cafeteria located in Jung-gu Seoul, Jung-gu, Seoul, the Defendant took a cleaning agent (the age of 51) for the victim’s bath without any reason; and (b) took a hand and the body of the victim’s body by hand.

이후 피고인은 계속하여 그곳을 지나가던 피해자 A(67세)이 쳐다본다는 이유로 피해자에게 "너는 뭐냐"라고 말하며 발로 피해자의 얼굴 부위를 1회 걷어찼다.

Accordingly, the defendant assaulted victims.

"2017 Highly 711"

1. Violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (Habitual damage to property, etc.);

At around 10:50 on May 13, 2017, the Defendant: (a) brought a dispute with K and alcohol on the front of the J convenience store located in Jung-gu Seoul, Jung-gu, Seoul; (b) brought about two plastic chairs of the above convenience store, which is the victim’s ownership, whose name cannot be known, and thereby damaged the property so that the amount of money can not be known, because the part of the arms is 10cm.

2. Violation of the Punishment of Minor Offenses Act;

On May 13, 2017, from around 11:20 to 12:20 of the same day, the Defendant, while drunk in the National Police Station of Jung-gu Seoul, Jung-gu, Seoul, by verbal abuse and abusive language, “I am frien by a knife, in accordance with the law,” “I am frien in the inside”, “I am frien by murder, by violence, I amhhh,” and “I am out of the place where I am out of the front line, I am snife” in the state of being drunk in the port of Jung-gu, Seoul, Jung-gu, Seoul.

Summary of Evidence

"2017Gohap586"

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness D andO;

1. A report on internal investigation (related to evidence collected by a police officer dispatched to the scene);

1. Reports, block photographs and explanatory notes used by a suspect for committing a crime;

"2017 Gohap640"

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The police statement concerning G;

1. Each statement prepared by G and H;

1. Each investigation report (related to the submission of moving pictures on a mobile phone and the report on confirmation of moving pictures on a mobile phone);

2017Gohap711

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each statement prepared by L or P;

1. The circumstantial statement of the principal offender, a photograph of damaged articles, and a prosecution document;

1. Each investigation report (on-site investigation, CCTV video reading at convenience stores and CCTV reading in a NA box);

【Prior Trial Records】

1. Criminal history records, etc., the Seoul Central District Court (A), the Seoul Central District Court 20165071, 2015 order 318, 2012 order 5797 order 2012 order 5797 order of each person, the current status of acceptance by each individual (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2017 High

Application of Statutes

1. Article relevant to the facts constituting an offense and the selection of punishment;

Article 2(3)1 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 3(4)1 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, Articles 284 and 283(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 2(3)1 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, Article 36(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 36(3)1 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, Article 3(3)1 of the Punishment of Minor Offenses Act (the fact that the head of a government office is responsible for the revocation of the head of a government office, the selection of fines)

1. Aggravation for repeated crimes;

Article 35 of the Criminal Act (Article 35 of the Punishment of Minor Offenses Act, excluding a violation of the Punishment of Minor Offenses Act, there is a criminal record of a violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, the execution of which was completed on March 11, 2017)

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

Imprisonment with prison labor and fines prescribed for a violation of the Punishment of Minor Offenses Act, among crimes except for a violation of the Punishment of Minor Offenses Act in the former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2 and 3, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act, which are the largest punishment (special intimidation).

1. Invitation of a workhouse;

Judgment on the assertion by the accused and the defense counsel regarding special intimidation against the victim D under Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act

1. Summary of the assertion

The Defendant used a string jum just, and did not threaten the victim by “a string a canter with a string of a canter.”

2. Determination

The victim D consistently stated at the investigative agency that "the defendant saw the red news block at the time and threatened him/her by driving away his/her losting." (However, D stated that "the defendant was trying to use the news report block at the time" at the investigative agency, but this court stated that "the contents of the above losting theory are not accurate memory." However, the witness 0 degree 0 stated in this court that "the defendant testified that he/she would not accurately memory the contents of the above losting report block at the time, and reported his/her behavior to the police" in this court like the witness 0 degree 0, "the defendant testified that he/she would be able to do so by using the red news report block at the time, and reported his/her behavior to the police." In the process of dispute with the victim, the defendant also recognized that the fact that he/she was fluding the lostical news block, which was placed on the floor of the victim, and unlike other facts that the above D and 0 statements are not reliable.

According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court, such as the witness D and 0's each legal statement, it is recognized that the defendant has threatened the victim by citing a string-flue news block set on the floor, such as facts constituting a crime.

We cannot accept this part of the argument of the defendant and his defense counsel.

Reasons for sentencing

1. Scope of punishment by law: Imprisonment with prison labor for not less than one year but not more than 36 years and a fine not exceeding 600,000 won;

2. Scope of recommendations according to the sentencing criteria;

(a) Basic crime: A crime of violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act;

[Determination of Punishment] Types 4 (Habitual, Cumulative, Special Intimidation) of Violence Crime>

[Special Convicts] Reduction element: Where the degree of intimidation is minor (Types 1, 4, 5)

[Scope of Recommendation] 4 months from 1 year to 1 year (Mitigation) imprisonment

(b) Concurrent crimes: Offenses in violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act;

[Determination of Punishment] Types 6 (Habitual, Cumulative, Special Violence) for Violence Crimes

[Special Escopics] Reduction element: Where the degree of assault is minor (Types 1, 6, 7)

[Scope of Recommendation] Imprisonment of 4 months to 1 year and 2 months (Mitigation)

(c) Concurrent crimes: Crimes of violating the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act;

[Determination of Punishment] Form 1 (Habitual, Cumulative, Special Destruction and Damage) habitually, Habitual, and Special Damage and Damage

[Special Convicts] Mitigation elements: Where actual damage is minor;

[Scope of Recommendation] 4 months from 10 months to 10 months of imprisonment, and violation of the Punishment of Minor Offenses Act: no sentencing guidelines are set.

(e) Scope of the recommended punishment based on the standards for handling multiple crimes: Imprisonment with prison labor for at least one year (the crime for which the sentencing criteria are set and the crime for which no sentencing guidelines are set are concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, considering only the lower limit of the range of sentence in the sentencing guidelines for the crime for which the sentencing guidelines are set (four months of imprisonment), but the lower limit of the statutory penalty is lower than the lower limit

3. Determination of sentence: Imprisonment with prison labor for a year and six months, and fine of a fine of KRW 500,000, the crime of this case is committed by the defendant, by drinking alcohol, repeatedly and by assaulting other persons, destroying property, etc., and is very bad in light of the situation and contents of the crime. The victim appears to have suffered considerable mental pain due to the crime of this case. The victim has already been punished due to multiple violence, including punishment, and the defendant again committed the crime of this case only in the month of the ductal, in which the execution of imprisonment has been completed due to the same kind of crime. Considering these circumstances, it is inevitable to punish the defendant significantly.

However, the fact that the health of the accused is not good shall be considered in consideration of the circumstances favorable to the accused.

In addition, the punishment as ordered shall be determined by comprehensively taking into account all the factors of sentencing as shown in the arguments in this case, such as the age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime.

The presiding judge, the highest judge;

Judges of the High Instance

Judges Kim Dong-dong