beta
(영문) 전주지방법원 2016.07.15 2015노1855

도로교통법위반(무면허운전)등

Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) is that of the lower court’s punishment (i.e., eight months of imprisonment and two years of suspended sentence, etc.) is too uneased and unreasonable.

2. The crime of this case was committed not only by the Defendant but also by the Defendant’s non-licensed driving or drinking alcohol driving, but also by the Defendant has been subject to criminal punishment several times in the same kind of crime. In particular, on June 24, 2014, at the Jeonju District Court’s Eup branch, the Defendant committed the crime of this case in the 2015 Highest 1062 Highest 15 Highest 1543 Highest 2015 Highest 15 Highest 1543 highest 1543 highest 2015 highest 15 highest 1543 highest 2015 highest 2015 highest 2015 highest 2015 high

On the other hand, the fact that the defendant acknowledges the crime of this case and reflects the mistake in depth, support two minor children in difficult circumstances, and one of them needs to be examined by the defendant due to the light, badness, unstable disorder, behavioral disorder, etc., and if the defendant is detained, the fact that the living of the child is very difficult if the defendant is detained, etc. is favorable to the defendant.

In full view of the above circumstances and other factors of sentencing as indicated in the records and arguments of this case, the court below’s punishment is too unfasible and unfair, and thus, the prosecutor’s assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor’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 by the court below (Article 40 and Article 50 of the Criminal Procedure Act). However, since it is obvious that the “the choice of each sentence of imprisonment with prison labor for the first time” was omitted from the “application of the law” of the judgment below, the prosecutor’s appeal is corrected to add it ex officio in accordance with Article 25(1) of the Regulation on Criminal Procedure.