특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(운전자폭행등)등
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. In light of the fact that the defendant's main reason for appeal is against depth, that the crime of this case was committed with extreme stress due to divorce, that the defendant's economic situation is very difficult, and that the defendant raises a child by negligence and does not commit any further crime, punishment (two years of suspended sentence in August) sentenced by the court below is too unreasonable.
2. In our criminal litigation law, which takes the trial-oriented principle and the direct principle, there is no change in the terms and conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and where the first instance court’s sentencing does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). In this case, there is no special circumstance or change in circumstances that may be newly considered after the pronouncement of the lower judgment.
In addition, according to the records and arguments of this case including the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, criminal history, and circumstances after the crime, the sentencing of the lower court’s judgment is not determined to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion, considering the various circumstances asserted by the Defendant on the grounds of appeal, even if the lower court’s punishment against the Defendant is too excessive, and thus, exceeds the reasonable scope of discretion.
3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition, since the defendant's appeal is without merit.