2021Do2995(a) Murder (the punishment, etc. of a crime of child abuse under the name of a preliminary crime)

【Violation of Special Act on Special Cases Concerning Child Abuse】

(b) Concealment of carcasses;

(c) Violation of the Child Welfare Act;

(d) Child Welfare Violation (child abandonment or neglect);

(e) Use and provision of social security benefits and discovery of beneficiaries;

Violation of law

(f) Violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Child Abuse Crimes;

(Death or injury)

(g) Fraud;

2021 Jeondo28 (Joint Attachment Orders)

1. (a) b. (c) d. g. A;

2. b. (c) d. (f) B

Defendants

Attorney Suh Law-at-law (the national line for defendant A)

Attorney Park Jong-chul (the national election for the defendant B)

Seoul High Court (Chuncheon), 2020No148, (Chuncheon), 2020 Jeonno17 decided February 3, 2021

(Consolidated) Judgment

may 7, 2021

All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. As to the grounds of appeal by the defendant and the respondent for attachment order A

A. Defendant case

Based on its stated reasoning, the lower court convicted Defendant and the person against whom the attachment order was requested (hereinafter referred to as “Defendant”). Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in accordance with the relevant legal doctrine and evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on intentional act, abuse, etc.

원심판결 이유에 의하면, 원심은 이 사건 변론에 나타난 모든 양형조건과 대법원 양형위원회 제정 양형기준에 따른 권고 형량의 범위, 유사한 다른 사건에서의 양형에 관한 형평성 등을 종합적으로 고려하여 피고인 A에 대한 형의 양정을 하였다. 특히 이 사건 범행은 피고인 A이 자신의 친자녀인 3명의 피해자들을 신체적으로 학대하고 방임하는 과정에서 피해자 E(생후 약 5개월)이 잘 자지 않고 울음소리가 시끄럽다는 이유로 피해자 E의 전신에 이불을 덮어 살해하고, 피해자 G(생후 약 9개월)가 울면서 보챈다는 이유로 목을 눌러 살해한 점, 사망한 피해자 E을 위하여 지급된 아동수당을 부정수급하는 등 그 죄질이 나쁜 점, 피해자 E, G가 숨이 막히는 커다란 고통 속에서 친부에 의하여 살해당하였음에도 불구하고 피고인 A은 수사기관이나 행정관서에 피해자녀들의 사망 사실을 알리지 않고 자신의 범행을 숨기고자 그 사체들을 은닉하였고, 정상적인 가정생활을 위하여 노력하거나 피해자 C에게 제대로 된 의식주를 제공하지 않아 피해자 C에 대하여 건강 및 정서적으로 회복할 수 없는 상처를 남긴 점 등을 불리한 정상으로 참작하는 한편, 피고인 A이 불우한 성장환경으로 인하여 충동조절장애 등 정신적 문제를 가지게 되었고, 소리에 민감한 나머지 피해자들의 울음소리에 폭력적 성향을 조절하지 못하고 충동적으로 자녀들을 살해하게 된 것으로 계획적인 범행이 아닌 점, 부정수급한 수당 중 일부를 반환하였고, 사기 범행 피해자와 합의하여 그 피해자가 처벌을 원하지 않는 점 등을 유리한 정상으로 참작하여 피고인 A에 대하여 징역 23년을 선고하였다.

Examining the record, even if the circumstances asserted in the grounds of appeal are considered, the lower court’s sentencing against Defendant A cannot be deemed significantly unfair.

B. As to the claim for attachment order

As long as the defendant files an appeal against the accused case, the appeal is deemed to have been filed regarding the case for which the request for attachment order is sought. However, there is no indication of the grounds for appeal in the petition of appeal, and there is no statement of grounds for appeal as to the grounds for appeal.

2. As to Defendant B’s ground of appeal

Based on its stated reasoning, the lower court convicted Defendant B of the facts charged. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in accordance with the relevant legal doctrine and evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine on predictability, as otherwise alleged in the grounds of appeal.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, all appeals are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Min You-sook

Justices Kim Jae-hyung

Justices Lee Dong-won

Chief Justice Noh Tae-ok