자동차관리법위반등
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.
Provided, That the above punishment shall be imposed for two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.
1. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that the court below's imprisonment (eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
2. On September 16, 2010, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 4 million at the Suwon District Court on January 16, 2013 by taking into account the following facts: (a) the Defendant was sentenced to one year of imprisonment with prison labor for the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes; and (b) the suspension of the execution of two years; and (c) the Defendant did not intentionally file an application for the registration of transfer of ownership to drive a vehicle, as stated in paragraph (1) of the criminal facts indicated in the judgment, in order to acquire and intentionally file an application for the registration of transfer of ownership; and (d) the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 4 million at the Suwon District Court on January 16, 2013 due to the fact that he/she was driving without a license from a drinking state; and (e) continuously and repeatedly drive
However, in full view of the following factors: (a) the Defendant led to the Defendant to commit the instant crime for a period of one month by committing the instant crime; (b) the driving without the instant license constitutes a simple without the license, which does not entail drinking or traffic accidents; (c) the Defendant disposed of the instant vehicle after the instant case; (d) the Defendant has no record of being punished more severe than the fine for the same kind of crime; (c) the Defendant, as an instructor of a dormitory-type training institute, as an instructor of the said teaching institute, has difficulty in commuting to and from the workplace, causing unlicensed driving of the instant case; and (d) other factors such as the Defendant’s age, character and behavior, environment, motive and circumstance leading to the instant crime; (e) circumstances before and after the instant crime; and (e) all of the sentencing factors as indicated in the arguments in the instant case, such as the Defendant’s age, character and behavior; (e) the Defendant’s motive and circumstance leading to the instant crime
3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is based on Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, since the defendant's appeal is justified.