beta
(영문) 대구고등법원 2017.08.07 2017노188

현주건조물방화

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

In light of the various sentencing conditions in this case, the sentence imposed by the court below (two years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

Judgment

Examining the various sentencing conditions of the instant case, the following are favorable to the Defendant: (a) the Defendant appears to be aware of and reflect the instant crime; (b) the Defendant committed the instant crime in a contingent manner under the influence of alcohol; and (c) the Defendant has endeavored to prevent the spread of harm, such as the Defendant’s evacuation to the victims immediately after the commission of the instant crime; and (d) there was no particular criminal history other than the past two times of fines sentenced.

On the other hand, the crime of this case is committed against the defendant, in light of the following: (a) the defendant had an oral dispute with a woman living together, and the defendant destroyed all the bonds of Han-style Housing where many lessees live together; and (b) in light of the motive, circumstance, method, and details of damage, etc. of the crime; (c) the crime of this case has a very significant criminal situation in light of the motive, circumstance, method, and details of damage, etc.; (d) the lessee has been discharged from Han-style Housing due to the crime of this case; and (e) the lessee has lost all the sites of life; and (e) the time of the crime is a new wall, the lessee could have suffered more severe damage if the lessee did not evacuate early; and (e) no damage has been restored to the trial.

As above, comprehensively taking into account all the factors of sentencing favorable or unfavorable to the defendant, including the following factors: the defendant's age, sex and environment, family relation, motive and background of the crime, method of the crime, and circumstances before and after the crime, etc., and all of the factors of sentencing indicated in the record and the theory of changes, etc., and the court below appears to have sentenced two years to the defendant within the scope of the recommended punishment set in the sentencing guidelines (two to five years of imprisonment). In addition, the court below in the first instance.