도로교통법위반(음주운전)등
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.
1. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that the lower court’s punishment (two months of imprisonment and fine of two million won) is too unreasonable.
2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant ex officio, Articles 157 and 153 of the Criminal Act provide that the punishment shall be mitigated or remitted, if a person who committed an offense without accusation under Article 156 of the Criminal Act voluntarily surrenders himself/herself to the court prior to the judgment on the reported case or the disciplinary action becomes final and conclusive. As such, the judgment of the court below is no longer maintained, since the defendant who led to the confession of the offense without accusation in this case, and there was a reason for mitigation or exemption of the punishment.
3. The judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing, on the grounds of the above ex officio reversal, and the judgment below is again decided as follows.
[Discied Judgment] The criminal facts recognized by the court and the summary of the evidence are the same as the entries of each corresponding column of the judgment below, and thus, they are quoted in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.
Application of Statutes
1. Relevant legal provisions concerning the facts of crime, Articles 148-2 (2) 2 and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act that choose the penalty, Article 156 of the Criminal Act and the choice of imprisonment, respectively;
1. Articles 157, 153, and 55 (1) 3 (Confession) of the Criminal Act, which are statutory mitigation;
1. Of concurrent crimes, Article 37 (former part), Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act [limited to the sum of the long-term punishments of the above two crimes] among concurrent crimes, Article 37 (1) and Article 38 (1) 2 of the Criminal Act (limited to the sum of the punishment for concurrent crimes which are heavier than the above two crimes, but referring to the punishment prescribed for the violation of the Road Traffic Act] requires strict punishment since it infringes actively on the state's criminal justice function, and causes the other party who does not commit the crime to be subject to criminal punishment. The crime in this case is