도로교통법위반(음주운전)등
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of violating the Road Traffic Act (drinking on drinking), among the facts charged in the instant case, and dismissed the public prosecution against each violation of the Road Traffic Act.
In that sense, the prosecutor filed an appeal only against the guilty portion and did not appeal against the dismissed portion of the public prosecution. Therefore, the dismissed portion of the judgment of the court below is determined separately and excluded from the scope of the judgment of this court.
2. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that the lower court’s punishment (amounting to KRW 7,00,000) is too unhued and unreasonable.
3. Determination
A. According to the Korean Criminal Procedure Act, which takes the principle of trial-oriented and directness, there exists an area unique to the first instance judgment regarding sentencing, and in light of the ex post facto and aesthetic character of the appellate court, it is reasonable to respect the first instance judgment if there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance judgment, and the first instance judgment does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). (b) The Defendant has the history of being punished as a fine by driving two times of alcohol, and the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years due to the obstruction of the performance of official duties, and was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years by imprisonment for the suspension of the execution of official duties, and was driving under the influence of alcohol concentration of 0.094% in blood while serving in the period of the suspended sentence of six months.
However, the above circumstances have already been launched in the oral proceedings of the court below, and there is no special change in circumstances that could change the sentence of the court below after the court below was sentenced, the defendant's error is recognized and reflects the defendant, the degree of action is not serious, the crime committed by the court of suspended execution is not the same kind of crime, and the sentence of a fine with a reasonable amount of punishment against the defendant by the basic living consumer is more effective, and the defendant's age, sex, environment, etc. are expected to be more effective.