도로교통법위반(음주운전)등
We reverse the judgment of the court below.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable that the sentence imposed by the court below (the first instance court: imprisonment of eight months, the second instance court: imprisonment of eight months, the suspension of execution of two years, the order to attend a law-abiding driving lecture, 40 hours of the community service order, and 80 hours of the community service order) is too unreasonable.
2. The judgment of the court below on the defendant's ex officio determination was rendered and the defendant filed an appeal, and this court decided to hold a joint trial on the above two appeals cases. Since each of the offenses against the defendant is concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, the judgment of the court below should be sentenced to one punishment pursuant to Article 38 (1) of the Criminal Act, and the judgment of the court below cannot maintain it as it is.
3. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's improper assertion of sentencing, and it is again decided as follows.
Criminal facts
The summary of the facts charged and the summary of the evidence admitted by the court are as stated in the corresponding column 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 148-2 (1) 1 and Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act concerning facts constituting an offense; Article 152 subparagraph 1 and Article 43 of the Road Traffic Act (unlicensed Driving)
1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Competition;
1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;
1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;
1. Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for mitigation of amount of punishment (Article 55(1)3 of the same Act is recognized as committing the crime of the court Decree No. 1 after the defendant was prosecuted by the court below with two times the punishment history of fines for the same kind of crime and the second instance court's indictment, but it is contrary to and against the fact that the defendant does not repeat.
being taken into account, such as being in progress)