beta
Main Issues
Whether Article 383 of the Criminal Procedure Act which limits the grounds of appeal is unconstitutional or not.
Summary of Judgment
Article 383 of the Criminal Procedure Act which limits the grounds of appeal cannot be said to be a violation of the Constitution.
[Reference Provisions]
Article 383 of the Criminal Procedure Act, Article 26 of the Constitution
Reference Cases
Supreme Court Decision 79Do2639 Delivered on January 15, 1980
Escopics
Defendant
upper and high-ranking persons
Defendant
Defense Counsel
Attorney Choi Chang-hee
Judgment of the lower court
Gwangju High Court Decision 86No324 delivered on June 26, 1986
Text
The appeal is dismissed.
The number of detention days after an appeal shall be included in the original sentence.
Reasons
As to the grounds of appeal by the Defendant and his defense counsel
With respect to this case on which the defendant was sentenced to a short-term two years and two years and six months of imprisonment, the assertion of unfair sentencing may not be deemed a legitimate ground for appeal under Article 383 of the Criminal Procedure Act. The above-mentioned provision restricting the grounds for appeal may not be deemed a violation of the Constitution (see Supreme Court Decision 79Do2639, Jan. 15, 1980).
Therefore, the appeal shall be dismissed, and the number of days of detention after the appeal shall be included in accordance with Article 24 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings under Article 57 of the Criminal Act. It is so decided as per Disposition
Justices Park Jong-soo (Presiding Justice)