상해
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the reasons for appeal (the imprisonment of eight months and the suspension of execution of two years) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination 1) Determination of sentencing is based on statutory penalty, which takes into account the factors constituting the conditions for sentencing prescribed in Article 51 of the Criminal Act within a reasonable and appropriate scope, on the basis of the statutory penalty.
However, considering the unique area of sentencing of sentencing of the first instance that is respected under the principle of trial priority and the principle of direct jurisdiction taken by our criminal litigation law and the nature of the ex post facto review of the appellate court, the sentencing of sentencing of the first instance was exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion when comprehensively taking into account the factors and guidelines for sentencing specified in the first instance sentencing trial process.
In light of the records newly discovered in the course of the appellate court’s sentencing hearing, it is reasonable to file an unfair judgment of the first instance court, only in cases where it is deemed unfair to maintain the sentencing of the first instance court as it is for the court to judge the sentencing of the first instance court.
In the absence of such exceptional circumstances, it is desirable to respect the sentencing of the first instance court (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). 2) The circumstances alleged by the Defendant as an element favorable to sentencing in the first instance court have already been discovered in the hearing process of the lower court, and there is no change of circumstances favorable to the sentencing criteria after the sentence of the lower court was rendered.
The crime of this case was committed by the defendant with an injury, such as an internal traumatic ebrosis, which requires four-day medical treatment at a time when the victim was inside the inner part of the victim, and in light of the father, frequency, etc. of the injury, the crime of this case is light.
shall not be deemed to exist.
In addition, the defendant has a total of 25 penalties, including two-time sentence, and 13 times among them is the same violent crime.
As such, it is inevitable to make a sentence heavier than a defendant who has a significant lack of compliance consciousness.