도로교통법위반(무면허운전)
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. The sentence imposed by the court below (ten months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with 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, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The fact that the Defendant reflects, and that the health is not good is favorable to the Defendant.
However, the Defendant, on April 6, 2016, was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years due to a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes) and a violation of the Road Traffic Act (U.S.) and was sentenced to a suspended sentence of ten months, and the judgment became final and conclusive on September 2, 2016, the Defendant completed the execution of each of the above imprisonment on January 1, 2018, when the said judgment became final and conclusive on September 2, 2016.
After that, the defendant was sentenced to four months of imprisonment on December 2018 due to a crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act (unlicensed Driving) and a crime of violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents (Bodily Injury) committed during the period of repeated crime, and the judgment was finalized on January 13, 2019.
Nevertheless, the Defendant committed the instant unlicensed driving again on February 15, 2020, which is a repeated crime of the same kind, and such circumstances are disadvantageous to the Defendant.
In addition, comprehensively taking account of the motive and background of the crime, means of crime, age, character and conduct, environment, family relation, etc., various sentencing conditions as shown in the arguments and records, etc., it cannot be deemed that the lower court’s punishment is excessively unreasonable because it goes beyond the scope of reasonable discretion.
3. The defendant's appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.