도로교통법위반(음주운전)
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (a prison term of one year, a suspended sentence of two years, a community service order of 120 hours and an order to attend a compliance driving lecture of 40 hours) that the court below sentenced 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 in the appellate
(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). In light of the foregoing legal doctrine, taking account of favorable circumstances such as the fact that the Defendant was against himself/herself and did not repeat the crime, the lower court, the fact that the execution of imprisonment equivalent to the maximum applicable sentences under the law that has been subject to discretionary mitigation is postponed, and there is no new circumstance to change the sentence of the lower court in the trial. In addition, even if considering all of the sentencing factors indicated in the instant argument, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive and means of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, the lower court’s sentencing is too excessive and thus, cannot be deemed to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.
3. As such, the defendant's appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed under Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.