logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2014.12.12 2014노3612
특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(절도)
Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

Nos. 1 through 6 of seized evidence shall be charged to the defendant.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable that the punishment of imprisonment with prison labor of the court below against the defendant is too unreasonable.

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant ex officio, the court below confiscated evidence Nos. 1 through 6, 14, and 15 which have been seized by applying Article 48(1)1 of the Criminal Act. The "goods which have been, or have been, provided or intended to be provided for an act of crime" under the above provision shall be deemed guilty and shall not belong to the ownership of a person other than the criminal. Accordingly, evidence Nos. 14, 15 except evidence Nos. 1 through 6 shall not belong to the ownership of a person other than the criminal, and there is no evidence to prove that the court below was, or has been, provided or intended to be provided for an act of crime which was found guilty.

Nevertheless, since the court below confiscated the above seized articles from the defendant, the court below erred by misunderstanding the facts or by misunderstanding the legal principles as to confiscation, which affected the conclusion of the judgment, and thus, the court below cannot maintain any further.

3. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing, on the ground of the above 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 admitted by this court is as follows. The first head of the judgment of the court below deleted "two months of imprisonment with prison labor for special larceny from the Incheon District Court on February 11, 2010", "Habitual theft of the victims" stated in the 10 and 11 of the facts constituting the crime, and the summary of the evidence is "A". The summary of the judgment of the court below is as follows.

arrow