(영문) 인천지방법원 2015.11.30.선고 2015고합518 판결

Imprisonment with prison labor for the crime of murdering and attempted murder committed by the Defendant, 7 years, and special property damage of the judgment; 4

shall be punished in each month.

(2) In the case of the crime of causing damage to the special property in the judgment, the penalty shall not be executed for one year from the date of the final judgment.

example.

One clicker Sicker's disease (No. 1) seized shall be confiscated.

Reasons

Criminal History Office

【Criminal Power】

On February 6, 2015, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years on July 23, 2015 for violating the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents in the Incheon District Court Branch Branch of the Incheon District Court, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on July 23, 2015.

“ 2015 Gohap518,”

From June 9, 2015, the Defendant was hospitalized in the Southern-gu Incheon Southern-gu Medical Care Hospital with 45 more Walinginginginging care due to the lack of personality, etc., and was being treated, the Defendant was suffering from a serious mind that the victim new knife (the age of 43) who is a patient at the same hospital was flicked in the corridor, etc., disregarding the Defendant, and booming the Defendant at half the time.

On August 23, 2015: at around 30: 17: 30, the Defendant discovered the victim who was frighted in the first floor GS25 convenience store of the Healing convalescent hospital and was seated with the Defendant and was frighted to the Defendant. Whether the Defendant frighted to the Defendant and fright to the Defendant. The Defendant fright to fright to fright to fright to fright to fright to fright to fright to fright to fright to fright to fright to fright to fright to fright to fright to fright to fright to fright to fright to fright to fright to fright to fright to fright to fright to fright to fright to fright to fright to fright to fright the

Accordingly, the defendant tried to kill the victim by cutting the victim's face into the floor of the hand, cutting the part of the victim's face into several times by drinking the part of the victim's face, cutting the part of the victim's hair into several times, cutting off the part of the victim's head, cutting off the part of the victim's head, cutting off the part of the victim's head, cutting down the part of the victim's head, cutting down the part of the victim's head into unfolding the part of the victim's head, cutting down the part of the victim's head, cutting down the part of the victim's head into the part of the rash with the part of the rash.

However, the Defendant did not commit attempted crimes because the victims suffered injury and murder, such as a multi-lateral state of trees open for treatment for about 35 days, circular blood amount reduction shock, etc., which require the victim's treatment, and then sent the victim to the Nam-gu, Incheon, Nam-gu, 74-ro 21,00 street hospital, and received a light part feling feling operation.

" 2015 Gohap583"

On January 23, 2015, the Defendant: around 50, at the second floor office of the Geumsan Transportation Company, where the Defendant had been working as a taxi shed in Nam-gu Incheon, the Defendant destroyed the said office by breaking it out by putting in a field 23 cm (23 cm in head, 25 cm in Jindo, and 25 cm in Jindo) which is a dangerous object, while finding the above office, and destroying it by breaking it by putting it out in a field 462, 940 won in total the market price of the victim Jung-gu management.

Accordingly, the defendant carried dangerous objects and destroyed another's property.

Summary of Evidence

“ 2015 Gohap518,”

1. The defendant's partial statement in court;

1. Examination protocol of the accused by the prosecution;

1. The witness Gu - The witness Gu - each legal statement on the new shotum.

1. A written diagnosis of injury;

1. The defendant, in the case of articles seized and seized, there are still a single colon's disease : Provided, That the defendant, in the case of articles seized under this Court;

- A witness who was sent to the site at the time, although he asserts that he was not a commission of a crime used by the person;

his statement (in the case of crimes in the iron tin box used to be separated from the defendant's statement at the scene of the crime, the crime is also committed.

The head of the Gu finds a shouldered Soaker's disease, which has been filled with a blood trace used by the Gu, and a shoulder at the site at the time.

While there were a number of fluoral sculptures, the fluoral cluoral cluor's cluoral cluor's clusium was found.

The details of the seizure of the instant criminal implements recognized by the Defendant, and the Defendant’s himself, also have committed this Act.

At all times, there is a difference in the string of the shouldered Sowing-Jaker's knicker's kicker's kicker's knicker's knif

In light of the fact that the above seized articles had been used for the crime of this case, the above seized articles used by the defendant

The defendant's above assertion is without merit.

" 2015 Gohap583"

1. Statement of the accused in the fifth trial records;

1. Statement to the police branch;

1. The original photograph and the damaged site, the damaged photograph, and the estimate of damaged articles;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Criminal history records, replys to a reply ( Kim-○) and judgment ( Incheon District Court Decision 2015No893);

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Article of the Criminal Act and the selection of punishment for the crime;

Articles 254 and 250(1) of the Criminal Act (the charge of attempted murder and the choice of limited imprisonment) and Article 369(1) of the Criminal Act

section 36, section 366 (Aggravated Punishment and Damage to Dangerous Property, Selection of Imprisonment)

1. Handling concurrent crimes;

The latter part of Article 37 and Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act.

The crimes of violation of the law of the same case shall be between

1. Suspension of execution;

Article 62(1) of the Criminal Code (For the crime of destroying and damaging special objects, the following favorable consideration of the reasons for sentencing:

1. Confiscation;

Article 48(1)1 of the Criminal Act (Offense of homicide)

Judgment on the argument of the defendant and defense counsel

1. Whether the person has committed the murder;

A. Summary of the argument

In order to warn the victim, the defendant was a dance that could have saved the sacrine saves of the victim in order to warn the victim, and there was no intention to kill the victim at the time of committing the instant crime.

B. Determination

1) The criminal intent in the crime of murder is not necessarily recognized to have the intention of murder or planned murder, but it is sufficient to recognize or have predicted that it is possible or possible to cause the death of another person due to his own act. The recognition or predictability of the crime is not definite, but it is so-called willful negligence even if it is uncertain. In a case where the defendant does not confession the criminal intent of murder, and only there was only the criminal intent of murder or assault, whether the defendant was guilty of murder at the time of the crime, shall be determined by taking into account the objective circumstances before and after the crime, such as the background leading up to the crime, motive for the crime, type and method of the crime, the nature and repetition of the attack, the degree of the possibility of the occurrence of the death, the existence of the result of the death, and the existence of the result of the crime, etc. (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 200Do2310, Aug. 18, 200).

2) In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court, the Defendant may be acknowledged without reasonable doubt that the Defendant went to the commission of the instant act even though he knew or predicted the fact that the victim would die at the time of the instant crime. Therefore, this part of the Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

① At the time of committing the instant crime, the Defendant took care of the victim’s face with the hand floor, so long as the victim’s face was unfolded, and took care of the part of the victim’s face through drinking and spinging. An empty spacker’s knife with the part of the victim’s head after leaving the part of the victim’s head and making the part of the victim’s knife more than several times (the victim’s knife and degree, the victim’s knife and knife immediately after committing the instant crime, and the victim’s knife and knife had a significant quantity on the part of the victim’s knife after committing the instant crime, and the Defendant’s knife of the victim’s knife with the part of the victim’s knife

② The victim was determined to have suffered an injury requiring medical treatment for 35 days at the time of the first diagnosis due to the following: (a) a multi-diver open upper part of the Defendant’s crime; (b) a circular blood quantity reduction shock, an open upper part of head divers; (c) a blood relative’s hand in which details are obscure; and (d) an open upper part of the body part of which details are obscure; and (b) a victim was in need of medical treatment (70 pages of investigation records).

③ While the Defendant had a victim take care of his face, the Defendant continuously prices the victim’s face while taking advantage of the victim’s face, and continued to take the victim’s face with her death, her death, her death, and her illness after having the victim take the victim’s head, and led the victim to her knife a part of the victim’s face several times.

④ In attacking a person’s head, there is a high risk of harming the victim’s life due to brain injury. Even after the victim loses consciousness, the Defendant prices the victim’s face with drinking and launchings several times. At the time of committing the instant crime, the victim’s knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife. On the other hand, knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife.

(5) An attack against a victim by the defendant was committed repeatedly, not only twice in one order, but also over several times even after the victim has lost consciousness.

④ The Defendant himself was also at the time of the prosecutor’s investigation on the part of her hand and the victim at the time of the prosecutor’s investigation on the part of her hand. On the part of her hand, the Defendant’s self-contested the victim to the extent that she would have to kill the victim on the part of her hand (in the investigation record 94 pages).

2. Whether the case constitutes an attempted suspension

A. Summary of the argument

The defendant voluntarily suspended the crime and asked other persons to report the 119 Report, etc., which constitutes an attempted crime.

B. Determination

Even in cases where an act of commission of a crime commences and the act of commission of a crime is suspended according to his own free will before the crime is completed, if the suspension is due to circumstances that obstruct the completion of a crime under ordinary social norms, it shall not be deemed as an attempted suspension (see Supreme Court Decision 9Do640 delivered on April 13, 199).

In light of the above legal principles, the defendant has already been aware of the face of the victim who has already been aware of by the defendant's assault several times, and again knife the victim's head by the main illness, and the defendant has reached knife several times with the head of the victim's head. The defendant seems to have already committed an act to the extent that the victim can die even with the above act alone. The defendant's act of the defendant is likely to dnife a considerable amount of knife. The execution of the crime of murder was completed, and that the result of murder was done by another before the victim's death, and it cannot be deemed as falling under the attempted suspension ( even if the defendant has suspended the execution of the act, the defendant's act is no longer likely to cause fear and fear about the victim's appearance, or that the defendant did not have committed the above act more freely than the defendant's punishment.

Reasons for sentencing

1. The scope of punishment by law;

(a) Crimes of murder: 5 years to 30 years; and

(b) Crimes of destroying and damaging special objects: Imprisonment for one month to five years.

2. Application of the sentencing criteria (crime of homicide) 1;

[Determination of Type 2] Type 2 (Ordinary homicide)

[Aggravated Punishment (Aggravation)]

There is no serious injury, anti-influence

[Scope of Recommendation] Aggravated Punishment (Crime of Imprisonment for at least five years, imprisonment for at least 20 years, or imprisonment for life or committing murder

1/3 of the minimum limit of the recommended sentence for murder crimes, the scope of the recommended sentence shall be

2/3 each reduction)

3. Determination of sentence: Imprisonment with prison labor for seven years (the crime of attempted murder), imprisonment for four months and suspension of execution for one year (the crime of special destruction and damage).

The crime of attempted murder of this case was committed by the Defendant due to an empty illness, breaking the body of the victim’s head, breaking the body of the victim’s body, and breaking the body of the victim’s body, etc. by hand, with the view to salvating the body of the victim, and the victim was unable to make a statement in the course of the investigation when the victim suffered serious injury and was in an unknown state in the patient room. The victim was likely to have caused serious consequences, such as the salving of the salvbing, and suffered physical and mental pain. The Defendant again committed each of the crimes of this case even though having been punished once against violent crimes, even though there was the history of punishment once, the Defendant did not go against the victim’s genuineness. In view of these circumstances, the Defendant need not be punished for severe punishment.

However, in the case of the crime of attempted murder of this case, when the victim who was in the same hospital was in a bad condition for appraisal, such as making the victim’s insulting speech on the day of the crime, it appears to have been somewhat contingent, and it appears to have been somewhat confruced. In the case of the crime of attempted murder of this case, considering favorable circumstances such as the violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents for which the judgment became final and the violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents and the violation of the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act in the context of concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act, the principle of equity in the case of concurrent crimes under Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act shall be taken into account, and

jury verdict and sentencing opinion

1. A verdict of guilt or innocence;

(a) Attempted murder;

- "guilty": 9 persons (with a unanimous verdict).

- Not guilty: 0 persons

(b) Destruction and damage of special property;

- "guilty": 9 persons (with a unanimous verdict).

- Not guilty: 0 persons

2. Opinions on sentencing

A. Crimes of murder;

- 5 years of imprisonment: one person;

- Seven years of imprisonment: four persons;

- Imprisonment, seven years and six months: one person;

- Nine years of imprisonment: three persons;

(b) Crimes of destroying or damaging special objects;

- Imprisonment for 4 months: one person;

- - Fines of 500,000: Eight persons;

For more than one reason, this case against the defendant is judged as ordered through a participatory trial according to his wishes.

Judges

The judge's personal display

Judge Jeon Sung-sung

Judges Maximum Beneficiaries

Note tin

1) The sentencing criteria shall apply to the crime of special destruction and damage in the holding in relation to the crime of violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents for which the judgment becomes final and conclusive and the crime of

subsection (1) of this section.

참조조문

참조판례