도로교통법위반(음주측정거부)등
All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.
In light of the favorable circumstances that the Defendant was punished for committing a crime of refusing to drive alcohol or to take a drinking alcohol test, the lower court, taking into account the following factors: (a) the Defendant’s refusal of the part concerning the crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (refluence of drinking), and the fact that there was a record of punishment for the crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (refluence of drinking), and (b) the Defendant’s age, sexual behavior, family relationship, family environment, motive and means of the crime, circumstances after the crime, etc., and determined the sentence (two years of suspended sentence for one year) by taking into account various sentencing conditions as shown in the instant records
The grounds for unfair sentencing (a confession, the circumstances leading to the crime) alleged by the defendant and the grounds for unfair sentencing (the risk of traffic crimes, the necessity of strict punishment, the possibility of recidivism, and the poorness of the crime) alleged by the prosecutor have already been taken into account in determining the punishment against the defendant or having changed the above sentencing conditions.
Considering the above sentencing conditions, the sentence of the lower court is too heavy or unbrupted to be considered as being performed within the reasonable scope of the discretion, and it does not seem unfair.
All the arguments of the defendant and the prosecutor are without merit.
3. In conclusion, since the appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit, all of them are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.