도로교통법위반(사고후미조치)
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is obvious that the Defendant was driven under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing the instant crime, and thus, at least, the Defendant should be punished more heavily than “a person who is under the influence of alcohol in response to the measurement of drinking alcohol in a net order without escaping from the scene of the instant case.” In light of the above, the Defendant’s punishment of the lower court (three million won of fine)
2. Determination
A. In light of the discretionary degree of sentencing by the fact-finding court, the principle of balance between crimes and punishment, and the principle of accountability that a reasonable balance should be achieved between crimes and punishment, and the principle of accountability that the responsibility should be based on and proportional to the responsibility (see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2005Do7288, Apr. 19, 2007).
As such, in a case where the fact-finding court did not prove, on the basis of the crime prosecuted against the defendant, the circumstances constituting a separate criminal offense that are not included in the sentencing conditions as prescribed by Article 51 of the Criminal Act, such as the circumstances after the crime, based on which the defendant was prosecuted, as a core sentencing condition, even though it was not proven by evidence having probative value to the extent that it excludes a reasonable doubt, the determination of the punishment is based on the heavy sentencing condition, and thus, constitutes the same substance as punishing the defendant for an additional crime that has not yet been prosecuted against the defendant, the determination of the punishment would be subject to an infringement of the above principle of balanced sentencing or the essential contents of the responsibility principle (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2017Do13457, Dec. 22, 2017; 2008Do1816, May 29, 2008). According to the records, the defendant’s blood alcohol concentration at the time of the crime of this case was a little drinking alcohol at the time of the defendant at the time of this case (amended.).