도로교통법위반(음주운전)등
All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The punishment of Defendant 1’s original decision (6 months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
(b)the sentence of the second judgment of the Prosecutor (one year of imprisonment with prison labor for a period of four months and one year of suspended execution) is too unhued and unreasonable;
2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for ex officio appeal, the judgment of the first and the judgment of the second court against the defendant was rendered, and the defendant filed an appeal against the judgment of the second court against the judgment of the second court, and the court decided to hold concurrent hearings against the above two appeals cases. The crimes of the first and second judgments against the defendant are concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and thus, one sentence should be imposed in accordance with Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. Thus, the judgment of the second and the second court cannot be maintained.
3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below Nos. 1 and 2 is reversed and the judgment of the court below is reversed in entirety pursuant to Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is again decided as follows.
【Inasmuch as the reasoning of the judgment in this Court is based on the facts constituting a crime and summary of evidence, the part of the judgment of the court below in the first instance is that the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 1 million for a fine of KRW 3 million for a crime of violation of road traffic laws in the Jeonju District Court's Gunsan Branch on February 19, 2002, the summary order of a fine of KRW 3 million for a crime of violation of road traffic laws in the Jeonju District Court's Gunsan Branch on February 19, 2009, the summary order of a fine of KRW 3 million for a crime of violation of road traffic laws (driving of alcohol) in the same court on January 21, 2013, and the summary order of a fine of KRW 3 million for the same crime in the same court on January 22, 2013.
Except for the modification to “the pertinent column of the first and second judgments,” it is identical to the description in each corresponding column of the original rulings, and thus, it is acceptable in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.