폭행치사등
All appeals by the Defendants and by the Prosecutor against Defendant B are dismissed.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The defendants' sentence (the defendant A: imprisonment of 2 years and 6 months; imprisonment of 1 year) is too unreasonable.
B. The lower court’s sentence against Defendant B of the Prosecutor is too unhued and unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. Defendant A recognized that all of his criminal acts were committed, and the mistake is divided, Defendant A appears to have committed the instant crime resulting from assault under the influence of alcohol, and it appears that Defendant A had endeavored to rescue the victim after committing the crime. The instant violation of the Forest Protection Act is a crime by negligence, which is favorable to Defendant A.
On the other hand, there was a significant result of the victim's death due to the Defendant A's crime of assault in this case, the bereaved family members suffered a significant mental shock, and the violation of the Forest Protection Act caused a fire of 5,748 square meters in the forest and the damage is considerably high.
Until the trial of the court, Defendant A did not recover from damage to each of the crimes of this case.
These circumstances are disadvantageous to Defendant A.
In addition to this point, considering all the sentencing conditions shown in the argument of this case, including Defendant A’s age, character and conduct, intelligence and environment, and circumstances after the crime, it is not recognized that the lower court’s sentence is too unreasonable because it is too unreasonable to the extent of the recommended sentence according to the sentencing guidelines.
B. The crime of this case, which cutting the victim's fingers by using dangerous objects by Defendant B, is very dangerous and is very serious to commit the crime, and thus, its possibility of criticism is very serious.
These circumstances are disadvantageous to Defendant B.
On the other hand, Defendant B recognized his criminal act and divided the wrong facts, and there are circumstances that may be considered in the process of the instant criminal act, and Defendant B lacks the ability to discern things or make decisions under the influence of alcohol.