Filed 10 / 25 / 21 P. v. Jung CA2/6

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or or dered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION SIX

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

BYUNG JAE JUNG

,

Defendant and Appellant. 2d Crim. No

. B 305741 (Super. Ct. No. BA469958 ) ( Los Angeles County)

A jury convicted appellant Byung Jae Jung of kidnapping (Pen. Code, § 207
, subd. (a) 1 ), false imprisonment by violence (§ 2 36 ), corporal injury on a cohabitant (§ 273.5, subd. (a) ), assault with a deadly weapon (§ 245, subd. (a)(1 ) (ADW) ),
criminal threat s (§ 422, subd. (a) (threats) ), and misdemeanor
assault (§ 2 40 ). The court sentenced him to state prison for nine years and eigh t months

.

1 All statutory references are to the Penal Code.2 Jung appealed

. He contends the trial court ought to have stayed the sentences imposed on the ADW and threats
convictions pursuant to section 654

. He also contends the court improperly imposed the sentence for false imprisonment because
it was a lesser included offense of k idnapping. We reverse Jung’s false imprisonment conviction and order
the trial court to correct a sentencing enhancement error in the abstract of judgment . The judgment is othe rwise affirmed.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND
Victim Peggy K. moved into Jung’s apartment shortly after they began dating in February of 2018. Jung soon suspected Peggy of cheating on him with an unidentified man. In May he
demanded she dial the numbers in her cell phone history to see if

a man answered. When only women picked up Jung told her to

sto p but immediately demanded to know if she intended to leave him. He grabbed a large kitchen knife and threatened to kill
himself if she left. P eggy hid the knife while Jung went to the bathroom and told him she would call 911 if he cut himself. They
returned to bed. Peggy attempted to sneak out of the house that evening while Jung slept. He a woke and intercepted her car

. She said she planned to visit her friend

. Jung showed up at the friend’s
house 30 minute s later and told Peggy she should not leave him

. He then dragged her to the car and drove back to his apartment. She jumped out as soon as they arrived but soon realized she left
her keys and wallet inside the car . Police escorted her to the apartment after she called them from a nearby restaurant. Accessing the unit through a window, she found neither Jung nor her personal items inside

.3 Peggy called Jung early the next morning . Jung agreed to return her items if she met him at the apartment building

. When she arrived, he grabbed her by the hand and dragged her through the lobby and up the stairs. He broke a beer bottle over her head and rep eatedly punched and kicked h er. Jung pulled Peggy into his apartment and said he intended to kill her and then himself.
He directed her to g et on his bed and spread her legs so he could cut off her genitals with a knife he had grabbed

. At some point
he swung the knife and cut Peggy’s finger.
The attack ended when p olice arrived and knocked loudly
on the door

. Jung fled by jumping off the balcony. Police found Pegg y covered in bruises and cuts. She told them Jung inflicted the injuries. They recovered the knife fro m under the bed and
found fresh blood on the bedsheets. Jung was arrested after a witness reported see ing him walk away from the apartment building naked from the waist down

. DISCUSSION
A. The Sentences for Assault with a Deadly Weapon and Criminal Threats Were Not Subject to Penal Code Section 654 Jung argues the trial court should have stayed his sentences for ADW and threats because they were part of an indivisible series of criminal acts culminating in Peggy’s kidnapping. ( § 654 ; see Pe ople v. Reed (2006) 38 Cal.4th 1224,
1227 [ “the trial court must stay execution of sentence on the convictions for which multiple punishment is prohibited” ].) We disagree.
A defendant’s intent and objectives determine whether a
series of criminal acts falls within section 654’s general bar on multiple punishments . ( People v. Harrison (1989) 48 Cal.3d 321, 335.) The evidence shows Jung’s assault and threats were not4

committe d in furtherance of Peggy’s kidnapping or to prevent her

escape. The crime was complete when Jung dragged her into his
apartmen t . (See, e.g., People v. Arias (2011) 193 Cal.App.4th 1428, 1435 [asportation requirement for kidnapping met where victim moved 15 feet into more secluded area of apartment where additional crimes would less likely be detected].) We find no
reason to disturb t he trial court’s decision to sentence Jung separate ly for the acts of torment occurring afterward

. B. False Imprisonment Is a Lesser Included Offense

of Kidnapping Jung asserts, and the People concede

, false imprisonment is a lesser included offense of kidnapping. ( People v. Ratcliffe (1981) 124 Cal. App. 3d 808, 820, citing People v. Bauer (1969) 1 Cal.3d 368, 375 . We reverse the conviction on count 3

. C. The Abstract of Judgment Incorrectly Identifies Jung’s

Weapons Enhancements
T he abstract of judgment mistakenly lists section 12022, subdivision (b)(2) instead of (b)(1) as the basis of the weapons
enhancement s found true as applied to his false imprisonment

, corporal injury on a cohabitant , and threats convictions

. The People again concede the point. We order the trial court to
correct the abstract accordingly.
DISPOSITION Jung’s conviction for false imprisonment (count 3) is
reversed and vacated . The abstract of judgment is modified to
reflect th is change and to c orrect its errant references to section 12022, subdivision (b)(2) . The enhancements on counts 4 and 8 should instead refer to subdivision (b)(1). The superior court clerk shall prepare an amended abstract and forward it to the5

Department of Corrections a nd Rehabilitation. The judgment is
otherwise affirmed. 

### NOT TO BE PUBLISHED.

PERREN, J.

We concur:

GILBERT, P.J.

TANGEMAN

, J.6 William N . Sterling , Judge Supe ri or Court Co unty of Los Angeles

______________________________

Jennifer A. Gambale

, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for D efendant and Appellant. Rob Bonta, Attorney General

, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Susan Sullivan Pithey, Senior
Assistant Attorn ey General, Steven D. Matthews, Supervising Deputy Attorney General, and Ryan M. Smith, Deputy Attorney
General.