(영문) 춘천지방법원 2017.08.10 2016노1121 | 리걸엔진

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 춘천지방법원 2017.08.10 2016노1121

마약류관리에관한법률위반(향정)

Text

All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) The lower court found Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged, inasmuch as the Defendant did not sell a phiphone to E on February 4, 2016, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts.

2) The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. On February 28, 2016, the lower court found the Defendant not guilty of this part of the facts charged, despite the fact that the Defendant had sold phiphones to D on February 28, 2016.

2) The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Examining the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the court below as to the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts in light of the records, the judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and there is no illegality of mistake of facts as alleged by the defendant.

B. Determination 1 on the Prosecutor’s assertion of mistake of facts) In light of the spirit of substantial direct deliberation under the Criminal Procedure Act adopted by our Criminal Procedure Act, the appellate court, as an appellate court, clearly erred in the first instance judgment on the credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance trial.

Except in exceptional cases where there are special circumstances, the first instance judgment on the credibility of a witness’s statement should be respected (see Supreme Court Decision 2006Do4994, Nov. 24, 2006, etc.). 2) In light of such legal principles, a thorough comparison of the judgment of the lower court with the records is justified, and there is no error of misunderstanding of facts as alleged by the prosecutor.

(c)

Defendant

In addition, when the sentencing stated by the court below on each prosecutor's unfair argument of sentencing is considered to have exceeded the reasonable limits of discretion, the judgment of the court below exceeded the reasonable limits of discretion.

It can not be seen, and there is also a change in the sentencing conditions that can be deemed unfair to maintain the sentencing of the court below.

참조판례

-대법원 2006. 11. 24. 선고 2006도4994 판결

유사 판례

-의정부지방법원 2017.08.07 2017노1465

-의정부지방법원 2018.01.15 2017노319

-의정부지방법원 2017.10.23 2017노2008

-대전지방법원 2017.01.12 2016노2838

-수원지방법원 2017.02.10 2016노8370