logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산고등법원 (창원) 2016.05.11 2016노94
현주건조물방화등
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. As to the misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, the building of this case is not the main building, but the general building, and the court below found the Defendant guilty of this part of the charges. Thus, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to the elements for the crime of fire prevention of the main building and thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The punishment sentenced by the court below against the defendant (two years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Determination of misunderstanding the facts and misapprehension of the legal principles 1) The phrase "a person uses a house as a residential place" in the crime of misunderstanding the structure of the present state and fire prevention under Article 164 (1) of the Criminal Act refers to the use by a person other than the offender as a residential place, and since the same person does not require continuous use, it constitutes "a case where a person uses a house as a residential place" as long as he/she continues to use or temporarily stay at the weekend or at a certain season, even if he/she remains in a state of being able to use it as a residential place. It does not require that the original purpose is to use it as a residential house or that it was built for the purpose of using it

2) Examining the following circumstances based on the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court in light of the legal doctrine as seen earlier, the instant building can sufficiently be recognized as a building used by a person as a residence, i.e., a “on-site building,” and thus, there was any error in the lower court’s finding and determining the facts pertaining to the facts charged

subsection (b) of this section.

Therefore, the defendant's mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles are without merit.

A) The exterior shape and the victim of the instant building are the owners of Section B of the J. The instant building is one of the two appurtenant buildings of Section B. The size of the instant building is approximately 20 square meters, and is in a shape similar to that of ordinary houses.

In this case.

arrow