(영문) 서울고등법원 2014.07.25 2014노1380 | 리걸엔진

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) 서울고등법원 2014.07.25 2014노1380

특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(강도상해등재범)등

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 under the influence of alcohol and had weak ability to discern things or make decisions.

B. The sentence of unfair sentencing (seven years of imprisonment) by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court regarding the claim of mental retardation, it cannot be deemed that the Defendant was aware that he had a certain degree of drinking alcohol at the time of each of the instant crimes, but did not have a weak state of the ability to discern things or make decisions.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of the same purport is without merit.

1) The Defendant only had been punished several times due to the robbery under the same law as the crime of robbery injury in this case, and each of the crimes of this case also appears to be a crime planned in advance, not a contingent crime, since the Defendant committed an act after drinking alcohol in P where the Defendant was residing, and committed a bus inside the city. 2) When the Defendant saw the body of the victim due to the head and face of the victim C beyond the consideration of head and face of the victim C, leaving the victim’s body by drinking and leaving the victim’s body, the Defendant detained the resistance, and then ordered the Defendant’s use of the wall card with the force of drinking and drinking, and ordered the Defendant to pay the price by the said card. In light of the circumstances of the crime, etc., it cannot be deemed that the Defendant’s act of changing things or making a decision by a person who lacks the ability to discern things or make decisions due to drinking.

3 The Defendant stated at an investigative agency that the main fact of the instant crime, namely, the fact that the Defendant was the victim C, the fact that the Defendant was drinking in E on the evidence record No. 90, and the fact that the face value of No. 92 was paid twice in advance on the evidence record, and the face value of No. 66 on the evidence record.

B. Each of the instant cases by the Defendant on the assertion of unfair sentencing.

유사 판례

-서울고등법원 2016.12.02 2016노2596

-창원지방법원 2020.06.11 2020노208

-창원지방법원 2020.10.08 2020노1423

-창원지방법원 2020.09.10 2020노490

-서울고등법원 2019.07.25 2019노1053