2. Determination

A. In light of the fact that the Criminal Procedure Act of Korea adopts the trial-oriented principle and the principle of directness exists in the area unique to the first deliberation as to the determination of sentencing, and the fact that the court of first instance ex post facto character of the appellate trial, etc., if there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance trial, and the sentencing of the first instance does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect such a case (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015).

However, the court below seems to have determined the defendant's punishment in consideration of all the above circumstances, and there is no particular change in circumstances in the matters which are the conditions for sentencing after the sentence of the court below.

On January 7, 2017, the Defendant issued a summary order of KRW 4,00,00 on February 2, 2017, which was subject to a fine of KRW 4,000,00, and on January 28, 2017, even though he/she controlled by drinking on January 28, 2017 (the summary order of KRW 2,00,000 is issued on April 7, 2017), on March 24, 2017, the Defendant refused a police officer’s legitimate demand for the measurement of drinking. On April 28, 2017, the Defendant was driving approximately 10 km under the influence of alcohol level of KRW 0.227%, among blood alcohol level on May 21, 2017, and was not under the influence of alcohol level of KRW 152%, at intervals of alcohol level of KRW 152%.

In particular, it is doubtful whether the Defendant seems to have used violence against other prisoners even during the prison life due to the instant case.

Such circumstances and the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, etc.