자동차관리법위반
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.
1. In light of the fact that the defendant is against the gist of the grounds for appeal, the punishment imposed by the court below (ten months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
2. The judgment of the Defendant did not reflect the fact that the Defendant committed the instant crime even during the period of repeated crime at the time of committing the instant crime, and led to the instant crime, which is disadvantageous to the Defendant.
On the other hand, the fact that the defendant does not repeat the charges after recognizing all the charges, and the fact that the defendant has no criminal record for the same kind of crime is favorable to the defendant.
In full view of such circumstances and the age, character and conduct, intelligence and environment of the defendant, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and the conditions of the sentencing as shown in the records and arguments, the sentence imposed by the court below is somewhat unreasonable.
3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the defendant's appeal is with merit.
Criminal facts
The summary of the facts charged and the summary of the evidence recognized by the court are as stated in each corresponding column of the judgment of the court below, and thus, they are quoted in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.
Application of Statutes
1. Article 79 Subparag. 13 and Article 53(1) of the former Automobile Management Act (amended by Act No. 12146, Dec. 30, 2013) (amended by Act No. 12146, Dec. 30, 201);
1. Determination of the sentence as ordered by comprehensively taking account of the conditions of sentencing prior to the reason for sentencing Article 35 of the Criminal Act among repeated offenders.