(영문) 창원지방법원 2020.09.24 2020노1126 | 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) 창원지방법원 2020.09.24 2020노1126

야간건조물침입절도등

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (each of the crimes listed in Nos. 1 through 6, No. 17, and No. 35: Imprisonment with prison labor for 2 months, suspended execution for 2 years, No. 7 through 16, No. 18 through 34, and No. 36 through 46: Imprisonment with prison labor for 8 months) declared by the court below is too unreasonable.

2. Where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the judgment of the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect the sentencing of the first instance court as an appellate court.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). Defendant’s mistake is repented and rebuttaled.

The total amount of damage from a living crime shall be 665,500 won.

Part of the crimes (No. 45, a year in the list of crimes attached to the judgment of the court of original instance) were attempted.

The victims do not want to be punished by the defendant by paying the amount of damage to six victims (the amount of damage KRW 320,500).

In the case of each crime listed in the annexed Table Nos. 1 through 6, 17, and 35 of the crime committed on the judgment of the court below, the balance between the crime of larceny at night and the crime of larceny at night in the judgment of the court below and the crime of latter concurrent crimes of Article 37 of the Criminal Act shall be considered.

However, there are few cases where crimes are committed.

Not only three times of punishment of the same kind (one fine, two times of the suspension of the execution of imprisonment, and two times of the suspension of the execution of imprisonment), but also re-offending during the suspension period.

In particular, some crimes are likely to have been committed while criminal trials on the cases are pending.

In addition, comprehensively considering various sentencing conditions, such as the defendant's age, health status, environment, family relationship, circumstances after the crime, and result, it cannot be deemed that the sentence imposed by the court below is too unreasonable beyond the scope of reasonable discretion.

The defendant's assertion that the sentencing of the court below is unfair is without merit.

3. Conclusion

참조판례

-대법원 2015. 7. 23. 선고 2015도3260 전원합의체 판결

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 2018.03.23 2017노8463

-수원지방법원 2016.10.19 2016노729

-청주지방법원 2019.11.08 2019노1437

-서울남부지방법원 2018.08.29 2018고단2676

-광주지방법원 2019.02.12 2018노3495