교통사고처리특례법위반(치사)
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) stated as if only a part of the damage was compensated for by liability insurance due to the reasons for sentencing of the judgment of the court below. However, in light of the fact that the victim's bereaved family members paid liability insurance proceeds of KRW 85 million to the victim's bereaved family members, and the victim's bereaved family members do not want the defendant's punishment, the punishment sentenced by the court below (one year and six months of suspended execution, three years of community service, 320 hours of compliance driving, 40 hours of compliance driving) is too unreasonable.
2. The judgment of the court below seems to have already been reflected in the judgment of the court below in the circumstance that ① the victim’s bereaved family members paid liability insurance amount to KRW 85 million, and the reasons for sentencing are stated as “the fact that part of damage is covered by liability insurance” in the judgment of the court below are merely difficult to calculate the definite amount of damage in the case of death of the victim or to present the concept that the damage is fully compensated, and thus, the circumstance that the responsible insurance amount was paid is reflected in the sentencing factors favorable to the defendant. ② The defendant caused the death accident in violation of traffic signal. ② The defendant caused the death accident. ② The degree of negligence is significant and the result of the accident is very significant, ③ there is no new special circumstance or change of circumstances that can be reflected in the sentencing after the decision of the court below, ③ there is no other special circumstance or circumstance that the defendant's age, sex, environment, relationship with the victim, motive and consequence of the crime, etc., the defendant's assertion that the sentencing of the court below exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion is not acceptable.
3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.