I Became a Law School Genius – 117



I Became a Genius Law School Student Episode 117

In this case choosing a position was more difficult than ever. It seemed like the prosecutor’s side would have an advantage or it would be better to choose the defense attorney’s side.

“I will choose the prosecutor’s side.”

After much thought I stood in front of the judge and answered that way. To be honest I wasn’t sure I made the right decision.

Nevertheless the reason I chose the prosecutor was because of a possibility that came to mind a little while ago.

“In that case I will take the defense side!”

Seungsu Hwang happily shouted.

“Honestly I was worried because either option seemed possible but it turned out well!”

‘Hey you too?’

It seems he was thinking the same thing as me. He was indeed an opponent who could not let down his guard.

I left the court and returned to the waiting room. And I once again used the VR device that I am now familiar with. As soon as I put on my helmet the familiar scene of the prosecutor’s office appeared.

“good. “Let’s go.”

There was no time to waste. There were many intertwined issues in this matter and there were more than a few that required a bit of effort to check for yourself.

“First of all… Breaking into a shared residence. “Start with this just in case.”

According to the records there did not seem to be any particular issue regarding the trespass to the apartment complex.

However isn’t it the legal argument competition that has been planting all kinds of traps in both records and VR simulations?

Even now the finals are the grand finale.

It was right to beat on the stone bridge and then cross it.

Fortunately it wasn’t difficult to check. All you have to do is watch the CCTV yourself and confirm that Kim Gap-dong and Lee Eul-nam went into A’s house together.

[Play CCTV video 1 (installation location: exterior wall of house A).]

A small holographic window appeared before my eyes and a video showing the two defendants at the time of the incident began to play.

Two people carrying thick bags take out tools from the bags. Then he tears down one wall and jumps inside.

[Play CCTV video 2 (installation location: inside the yard of A’s house).]

To be able to build and live in a single-family home in Seoul you must be quite wealthy. As expected from a wealthy family A’s house seemed to have two CCTVs installed.

In this video the angle was slightly changed and two people were filmed walking to the front door after breaking down the fence.

Lee Eul-nam takes out the equipment he prepared in advance opens the door and goes inside with Kim Gap-dong.

Get notified for updates: https://discord.gg/93rmBjgP6B

“…What is that?”

In the video Lee Eul-nam’s pockets on both sides are bulging. When I zoomed in a little I saw the head of something similar to a piece of wood sticking out.

“Is this a piece of wood used for arson?”

At first glance it seems that the evidence list included a burnt piece of wood used as a means of arson as evidence.

For now let’s remember this.

After a little more time had passed of the two Kim Gap-dong came out first and quickly left the scene.

After a few minutes Lee Eul-nam also appeared in the yard again.

Afterwards the building was engulfed in fire and immediately after the fire was extinguished Lee Eul-nam went back inside and then rushed out.

It was probably at this point that they confirmed A’s death and stole the precious metal.

“It seems like breaking into a shared residence is not a problem.”

They were found guilty of trespassing into a shared residence at the time they broke down the wall and came inside together.

“Next is Lee Eul-nam’s special theft part….”

We will point out the issues that can be argued about one by one.

Criminal Law Article 331 (Special Theft)

① Any person who damages a door fence or other part of a building at night enters a place specified in Article 330 and steals another person’s property shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year but not more than ten years.

② A person who carries a weapon or two or more people join together to steal another person’s property shall also be subject to the punishment set forth in paragraph (1).

The issue of the crime of setting a fire and then going back in and stealing precious metals.

“Lee Eul-nam is number 1 in special theft.”

Kim Gap-dong left the scene before A’s house burned down. Lee Eul-nam’s theft was something he did alone so it cannot fall under paragraph 2.

However since he broke the wall late at night and stole the goods as a result Article 1 of special theft can be established.

“The question here is whether this is really theft.”

The crime of theft occurs when someone steals ‘property that is in the possession of another person.’ Taking something that is not in your possession constitutes a separate crime called ‘embezzlement of property out of possession.’

But a problem arises here.

“Is stealing things from a dead person theft?”

A would have been dead when Lee Eul-nam stole the items.

However a person who is already dead cannot ‘occupy’ an object.

As a result Lee Eul-nam took an item that was out of possession so it is possible to argue that it is not a special theft but merely embezzlement of an item out of possession.

The latter’s sentence is much lighter than the former so it is a more favorable argument.

“It’s something that Hwang Seung-soo would have to risk.”

Since A is dead he cannot take possession of the precious metal. If possession is not possible the crime of theft is not established. There are quite a few judges and legal scholars who support this logic.

However there was no need to do troublesome work such as investigating the time of A’s death to refute this.

“Because there is a precedent that can be legally refuted.”

Hansul will be out there doing the hard work of exploring precedents and writing opposing arguments.

I leave the issues that can be solved externally to her and I save time and start exploring other problems.

It was a situation where time was running out and we couldn’t get through it without doing that.

In my mind I assume that the review of special theft has been completed and put it aside.

“Next driving without a license.”

Join our discord and ping me to update more chapters. Discord: https://discord.gg/93rmBjgP6B

According to records Lee Eul-nam drove A’s vehicle without a license while fleeing the scene.

In this regard the crime of illegal use of automobile lights and the crime of driving without a license can each be established.

Article 43 of the Road Traffic Act (Prohibition of Unlicensed Driving etc.) No one shall drive a car etc. unless he or she has obtained a driver’s license from the Commissioner of the City/Provincial Police Agency in accordance with Article 80 or if the driver’s license has been suspended.

It’s a simple rule. If you drive without a license that is driving without a license.

However even these simple charges were not without issues that needed to be considered.

“What exactly is ‘driving’?”

Precedents consider that only driving on roads under the Road Traffic Act constitutes driving as a principal offense.

In other words driving a car without a license in a place other than a road such as a private yard or an apartment complex parking lot is not considered unlicensed driving.

Therefore it is necessary to accurately identify the section that Lee Eul-nam drove and determine whether the section can be classified as a ‘road’.

“Let’s think back to the investigation report and the suspect interrogation report.”

I look back on my memories.

– …(omitted)… When I brought out the jewelry I found it was a public parking lot. At that moment I found A’s car parked without the engine running. In order to get out of the scene as quickly as possible I got into A’s car and drove outside the parking lot.

– But then I suddenly remembered that I had my license suspended and now I don’t have a license. I thought it might be a problem so I immediately got out of the car and started walking from there back home.

“Even thinking about it again he’s still funny.”

He was a violent criminal who set fire to someone else’s house and stole money so he got out of the car because he was worried about driving without a license. I couldn’t figure out what kind of accident circuit was going on.

Of course that doesn’t mean it’s not credible.

According to the investigation report the behavior was consistent with CCTV analysis records and it was common for criminals who were in a state of excitement after the original crime to make somewhat incomprehensible judgments.

In short the contents of the suspect interrogation report are true.

The place where Lee Eul-nam drove was a public parking lot in a single-family housing complex.

With this in mind let’s visit the site in person.

[Move location.]

[Public parking lot of single-family housing complex in XX building (crime site 3)]

“Wow I’m dizzy.”

The sudden change in scenery made me dizzy. I closed my eyes for a moment grabbed my temples calmed my stomach and opened my eyes.

Before I knew it I was standing in the parking lot in question.

The overall interior facilities gave the impression that they were clean and well maintained.

Among the parked cars were many famous foreign cars that even I had heard of.

It is said to be a single-family residential complex but it is a space that makes you think that it is indeed a wealthy neighborhood.

“Let’s take a look.”

It was said earlier that parking lots are not considered roads under the Road Traffic Act. But that wasn’t necessarily the case.

In order to determine whether a parking lot is a road certain conditions must be considered.

Road Traffic Act Article 2 (Definition)

1. “Road” refers to any of the following places:

go. Road according to the Road Act

me. Toll road under the Toll Road Act

all. Rural roads in accordance with the 「Rural Road Maintenance Act」

la. In addition in reality it is an open place where an unspecified number of people or cars and horses can pass and it is a place where it is necessary to ensure safe and smooth traffic.

However the parking lot does not apply to A or D.

The problem is. Is it a ‘public place’ or a ‘place where safe and smooth transportation needs to be secured’?

If it is a place that can only be used by a small number of people it will not be applicable and if it is a place that an unspecified number of people can pass by it is considered to be open and there is a need to recognize the road status.

“According to precedent an important criterion for judgment is whether an access blocking device is installed or a manager is present to prevent the public from entering.”

So the reason I visited the site was ultimately to confirm that. I came to a conclusion after taking a walk around the entrance and interior of the parking lot.

“There is nothing like that.”

For a parking lot in a wealthy neighborhood there was surprisingly no way to restrict access.

Rather among the luxury foreign cars there were some old domestic cars that looked like cars parked by outsiders.

“The exit from the parking lot is directly connected to the outside of the complex.”

For this reason it seems more appropriate to view it as a public place.

Anyone can come and go freely and there are no people or facilities to stop this.

Several cases passed through my mind in similar situations where the roadworthiness was recognized and unlicensed driving was considered guilty.

“Was it a trap using preconceived notions?”

Parking lots within residential complexes are often determined not to be roads.

And it is a common sense judgment that in wealthy villages access control will be even more closed.

Wasn’t the situation designed so that if you knew the legal principles using these two things it would be easier to make a mistake?

If true it could not have been a truly malicious intention.

“Well one important issue has been resolved.”

What remains is the main dish and the most important part of this case.

It was time to check the issue of the Hyeonju building arson fatality.