logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2019.05.16 2019노722
특정범죄자에대한보호관찰및전자장치부착등에관한법률위반
Text

All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

Reasons

1. The defendant did not submit a statement of grounds for appeal within the lawful period for submitting the grounds for appeal, and the petition of appeal filed by the defendant does not contain any grounds for appeal, and no grounds for ex officio investigation can be found even after examining the records. Thus, a decision to dismiss the defendant's appeal in accordance with Articles 361-4(1) and 361-3(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act should be made, but as long as a decision is rendered on the prosecutor's appeal, the dismissal of appeal shall not be separately decided, and shall

2. Determination on the prosecutor’s appeal

A. The summary of the grounds for appeal 1) misunderstanding of facts: (a) the Defendant was subject to the Incheon District Court’s Branch Branch Decision on the following: (b) the Defendant imposed a matter to be observed: (c) on the probation officer in charge with the reason, period, place of movement, etc. in advance; and (d) the Act on Probation and Electronic Monitoring, Etc. of Specific Criminal Offenders (hereinafter “Electronic Devices Attachment Act”). The main text of the matter to be observed is the Act on the Probation and Electronic Monitoring, etc. of Specific Offenders.

Article 9-2 (1) 2-2, and the proviso to matters to be observed may be deemed based on subparagraph 5 of the same paragraph.

Inasmuch as the proviso to the above matters to be observed does not add any condition to the travel period, destination, etc., it shall be deemed that the matters to be observed have been violated even if he temporarily stays outside the place of residence.

However, the court below found the defendant not guilty of this part of the facts charged on the premise that the proviso to matters to be observed is based on Article 9-2 (1) 2-2 of the Electronic Monitoring Act, and that the meaning of the proviso is unreasonably limited and interpreted.

(2) The defendant was unable to visit a probation office without having made a prior promise, which is for the sound return to society.

arrow