교통사고처리특례법위반등
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,500,000.
The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is unreasonable because the penalty of 1.5 million won imposed by the court below on the defendant is too unreasonable.
2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant ex officio, according to the records, the crime of violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents in the judgment constitutes a commercial concurrence under Article 40 of the Criminal Act. Since the court below erred by omitting this in the application of statutes, the judgment of the court below was no longer maintained at this point.
3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the grounds for appeal of the defendant, and the judgment below is reversed and it is again decided as follows.
Criminal facts
The summary of the facts charged and the summary of the evidence recognized by the court are the same as the corresponding columns of the judgment of the court below, and thus, they are quoted in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.
Application of Statutes
1. Article 3 (1) and the proviso of Article 3 (2) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Handling of Traffic Accidents by Relevant Acts concerning criminal facts, Article 268 of the Criminal Act, subparagraph 1 of Article 152 of the Road Traffic Act, and Article 43 of the Road Traffic Act;
1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Concurrent Crimes (Punishment on the violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents against Victims C with heavier penalty);
1. Selection of each alternative fine for punishment;
1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act (Aggravation of concurrent crimes with the punishment prescribed for the violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents which is heavier than punishment);
1. The reason for sentencing under Articles 70 and 69(2) of the Criminal Act for the punishment of the same case is that the defendant recognized all of the crimes of this case and reflects his mistake. Since 1965, there has been no criminal conviction for about 50 years since the fact that he was suffering from disease, such as cryposis, high blood pressure, and cryposis, and it is good that the defendant recently suffers from disease such as cryposis, cryposis and cryp cryp cryp cryp cryp cryp.