특수상해
All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing: imprisonment for two years, three years of probation, probation, community service order 200 hours, Defendant D: imprisonment for one year and six months of probation, three years of probation, the community service order 200 hours, DefendantE, and F: Imprisonment for one year and four months of probation, two years of probation, 160 hours of the community service order, Defendant I: imprisonment for one year and one year of probation, two years of probation, two years of probation, 120 hours of the community service order, Defendant H: imprisonment for one year and two years of probation, two years of the probation, 120 hours of the community service order, Defendant H: imprisonment for one year and two months of the probation, two years of the probation, and 80 hours of the community service order).
Defendant
D and H in the case of a foreigner of Chinese nationality who is sentenced to imprisonment without prison labor or heavier punishment, shall take into account the situation that the foreigner is likely to be forced to retire.
2. The appellate court’s judgment is reasonable to respect the sentencing condition in comparison with the first instance court where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing, and the sentencing of the first instance court is not beyond the reasonable scope of discretion.
The lower court appears to have determined the sentence in full consideration of the various favorable and unfavorable circumstances to the Defendants, and there is no special circumstance to change the sentencing after the lower judgment.
In addition, examining the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, circumstances after the crime, circumstances after the crime, and the record of the crime in this case, it is not determined that the court below's punishment against the defendant is too unreasonable because it goes beyond the reasonable scope of discretion.
On the other hand, with respect to the assertion of the concern of forced expulsion against Defendant D and H, it is determined that the above Defendants cannot be sentenced to the suspension of sentence of imprisonment with prison labor, in light of the aforementioned sentencing conditions, when the statutory penalty for the crime of special injury, which is recognized to the above Defendants, is not a fine of not less than one year but not more than ten years.
In particular, in the case of Defendant H, two years of imprisonment with prison labor for the violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint injury).