교통사고처리특례법위반(치상)
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that the sentence of the lower court (six months of imprisonment without prison labor, two years of suspended execution, and forty hours of participation in the compliance driving lecture) is too unreasonable.
2. It is reasonable to respect the sentencing conditions compared to the judgment of the first instance court, if there is no change in the sentencing conditions, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion.
(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). The lower court rendered the above sentence in consideration of various sentencing conditions, such as: (a) the Defendant’s vehicle is covered by comprehensive insurance; (b) the Defendant’s vehicle is covered by comprehensive insurance; (c) the Defendant’s error is recognized; and (d) the Defendant has no other penal power, given that there are no special circumstances or changes in circumstances that may be considered for new sentencing after the sentence of the lower judgment, in light of the degree of excessiveness of the Defendant; and (b) the number of victims and the degree of injury; and (b) the Defendant’s error is recognized; and (c) the Defendant has been punished once
In addition, comprehensively taking account of the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, motive and background of the crime, etc., the sentencing of the lower court does not seem to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion, as it is too excessive.
3. The defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal is groundless.