특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(도주차량)등
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendant
A Imprisonment with prison labor of one year and six months, and Defendant B shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor of one year.
seizure.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal against the Defendants is unreasonable because each of the punishments of the lower court (two years and six months of imprisonment, confiscation, and two years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
2. In order to raise the amount of money, the Defendants planned to find the hospital hospitalization room, etc., and continued larcenys over several occasions, and operated the stolen vehicle identification board to change the stolen vehicle identification board, and used the stolen credit card several times, the Defendants again committed the instant crime despite the fact that the Defendants received multiple juvenile protective disposition due to the same type of crime, and in particular, Defendant A committed the instant crime in spite of the fact that: (a) driving a vehicle without a license while driving the vehicle, resulting in an accident, resulting in an serious injury to the victim; and (b) escape from the site without taking protective measures against the victim; and (c) thus, the Defendants need to be punished corresponding thereto.
However, in full view of the following circumstances: (a) the Defendants recognized all the instant offenses; (b) the Defendants’ age is the victim L, S, V, P, F, and Y agreed in the lower court; (c) the Defendants made efforts to recover from damage by agreement with the victim N,N, and AM in the trial; (d) some thefts were returned to the victims; (c) Defendant A was the first offender; and (d) Defendant B did not have any criminal record of qualification suspension or more; and (e) other circumstances that form the conditions for sentencing specified in the instant case, such as the Defendants’ age, character, character, environment, family relationship, and circumstances after the commission of the instant offenses; and (e) the Defendants and their attorneys’ respective arguments on unfair sentencing are deemed unfair.
3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the defendants' appeal is reversed.