logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2015.02.05 2014노4684
특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(절도)
Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

Reasons

1. In view of the fact that property was stolen over several occasions in the same way as the gist of the grounds for appeal, and the criminal nature of the defendant is not good, the sentence imposed by the court below (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too uneased and unreasonable.

2. In the trial of the court of the ex officio judgment, the prosecutor applied for changes in the indictment with respect to the defendant's name of "violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes" as "Habitual larceny", and the applicable provisions of the relevant part of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes as "Articles 5-4 (1) and 329 and 342 of the Criminal Act" as "Articles 332, 329, and 342 of the Criminal Act". Since the court permitted the changes in the subject of the trial, the court below

3. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without a need to judge the prosecutor's allegation of unfair sentencing, on the grounds of ex officio reversal, and the judgment below is again decided as follows.

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts charged and the summary of the evidence recognized by the court are as stated in each corresponding column of the judgment of the court below, and thus, they are quoted in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. The grounds for sentencing under Article 332, Article 329, and Article 342 of the Criminal Code for criminal facts and Articles 332, Article 329, and Article 342 of the Criminal Code for the choice of punishment of the crime of this case are all recognized and against all the crimes of this case, some victims do not want the punishment of the defendant, and the restoration of damaged articles is favorable to the defendant.

However, the defendant has been subject to juvenile protective disposition several times due to theft and has a record of being punished for the suspension of the execution of imprisonment. Nevertheless, the defendant intrudes on another person's residence over several times and steals things or attempted larceny.

arrow