도로교통법위반(음주운전)등
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. As to the forgery of a private document and the uttering of a private signature among the facts charged in the instant case by misapprehending the legal principles, the Defendant’s act of arbitrarily signing and submitting to police officers the “F” on the charge of forging a private signature and the uttering of a private signature among the facts charged in the instant case. Since the crime of forging a private document, the crime of uttering of a private document, and the crime of uttering of a private signature and the crime of uttering of a private signature are also established, the crime of forging a private document, and the crime of uttering of a private document, and the crime of uttering of a private signature and the crime of uttering of a private signature and the uttering of a private document, only the crime of forging a private document and the crime of uttering of a private signature and the use of a private signature
Nevertheless, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the charges, which erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.
(2) The sentence of imprisonment (six months of imprisonment) imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable.
B. The sentence imposed by the lower court is too uneasible and unfair.
2. Determination
A. In light of the principle of no accusation in determining the Defendant’s assertion of misapprehension of the legal doctrine, the court may not render a judgment without a public prosecution by the public prosecutor, and the court shall make a judgment within the scope of the public prosecution by the public prosecutor. As long as the public prosecutor voluntarily signed the Defendant’s report on the state of his/her driver and his/her voluntary behavior and submitted it to the police officer, the charge of forging private documents, the crime of uttering of a private document, and the crime of forging a private signature and the crime of uttering of a private signature and the crime of uttering of a private signature and the crime of uttering of a private signature and the crime of uttering of a private signature and the use of a private signature, it cannot be deemed that the crime of forging a private document and the uttering of a private document cannot be punished separately by absorbing the crime of
Therefore, the defendant's above misapprehension of legal principles is without merit.
B. Determination on the assertion of unfair sentencing by the Defendant and the prosecutor