(original)20No91 homicide

A

Defendant

Persons who have stolen property, and stuffed (public trial)

Attorney Park Jong-il, Kang-chul, Dok-won

Changwon District Court Decision 2020Gohap6 Decided May 7, 2020

September 9, 2020

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

The punishment sentenced by the court below (12 years of imprisonment, etc.) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

The facts of the instant crime are recognized by the Defendant, and the Defendant committed a mistake in the truth, and the Defendant appears to have committed the instant crime in a contingent manner without participating in netization because of a serious dispute with the victim. The Defendant appears to have committed a crime of this case by participating in a cruel manner in her husband, and the Defendant appears to have to live the remaining life of the victim, the victim’s children, who are the victim’s bereaved family members, want the Defendant’s wife, and the Defendant is the first offender who has no criminal history, etc., in favor of the Defendant.

On the other hand, human life is the highest legal interest that the State and society should protect, and the act of infringing on it is the most fundamental and absolute value, regardless of its reason, and therefore, it is inevitable to punish it strictly. The crime of this case is an unfavorable circumstance to the defendant, such as: (a) the defendant, in dispute with the victim who is one's husband, was deprived of the victim's head by cutting off about 20 times the victim's head part which the victim possessed to threaten the defendant; (b) the crime was very heavy in light of the method and consequence of the crime; (c) the crime was very serious; (d) serious fear and suffering difficult until the victim died; and (e) the act of killing the spouse who has entered into a matrimonial relationship with the married couple is to destroy the legal and moral responsibility based on marriage relations and thus, (e) serious punishment is necessary.

In full view of the above circumstances and the Defendant’s age, character and conduct and environment, the motive and background leading to the instant crime, the means and methods of committing the crime, the circumstances after the instant crime, especially the cruel and serious nature of the instant crime committed by the Defendant, etc., all the sentencing conditions indicated in the pleadings of the instant case, including the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, and environment, and the scope of recommended sentencing guidelines for the enactment of the Sentencing Commission (one year to one six years), etc., it is not determined that the sentence imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

The senior judge of the presiding judge;

Judges Anti-Jin-dong

Judge Lee So-young