beta
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2020.03.27 2020노65

도로교통법위반(음주운전)등

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The sentence imposed by the court below (one year and four months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the judgment of the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). The legislators amended the Road Traffic Act on December 24, 2018 by taking into account the social damage caused by drunk driving, the gravity of the offense, etc., and Article 148-2(1) of the Road Traffic Act, which applies to the Defendant, provides that a person who violates the provision on prohibition of driving under the influence of alcohol, shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than two years but not more than five years, or by a fine not less than ten million won but not more than twenty million won.

The lower court sentenced a sentence lower than statutory punishment after discretionary mitigation, taking into account the favorable circumstances for the Defendant, such as the fact that the Defendant appears to reflect each of the instant crimes, the occurrence of traffic accidents caused by each of the instant crimes, and the fact that the Defendant had no record of criminal punishment exceeding a fine. At the time of each of the instant crimes, each of the instant crimes was committed, with a high blood alcohol level at the time of which the Defendant was tried, and the Defendant was tried by this court on September 5, 2019, and the Defendant’s crime committed on September 1, 2019, with the seal affixed by this court, did not seem to have a high possibility of criticism due to the influence of drinking driving while the license was revoked on November 1, 2019. The fact that other drivers who witness the abnormal driving behavior of the Defendant at the time of each of the instant crimes had a high risk of reporting a drunk driving, and that the Defendant had already been sentenced twice to a fine, including the Defendant’s age, character and behavior, family relationship, background of the instant crime, distance from each of the instant crime, etc.