교통사고처리특례법위반(치사)
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is that the lower court’s punishment (one year of imprisonment without prison labor, two years of suspended execution, 40 hours course, and 80 hours community service) is too uneased and unreasonable.
2. The determination of sentencing is based on statutory penalty, and the discretionary determination is made within a reasonable and reasonable scope, taking into account the factors constituting the conditions for sentencing prescribed in Article 51 of the Criminal Act.
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.
Unless there exist such exceptional circumstances, it is desirable to respect the sentencing of the first instance court (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The lower court rendered the above sentence to the Defendant with due regard to the sentencing stated in its reasoning. However, the circumstance unfavorable to the sentencing claimed by the prosecutor in the trial of the lower court is already considered as the condition of sentencing in the course of the sentencing examination of the lower court, and the lower court’s judgment on the basis thereof exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.
It is difficult to see the sentencing conditions, and there is no particular change in the conditions of sentencing in the trial. Therefore, it is reasonable to respect the sentencing of the court below.
Therefore, the prosecutor's improper argument of sentencing is without merit.
3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.