(영문) 광주고등법원 2020.01.14 2019노424 | 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) 광주고등법원 2020.01.14 2019노424

특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(운전자폭행등)등

Text

Defendant

In addition, the appeal by the candidate for medical treatment and custody is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The punishment sentenced by the court below to the defendant and the candidate for medical treatment and custody (hereinafter “defendants”) is too unreasonable.

B. Considering that the Defendant’s intent to treat the Defendant in a medical treatment and custody case is strong, and that the Defendant continuously prescribed the medical treatment and custody facility and received the medical treatment, the lower court’s judgment that sentenced the Defendant to medical treatment and custody is unreasonable even though the risk of recidivism can be mitigated sufficiently through outside medical institutions even if the Defendant is not a medical treatment and custody

2. The lower court determined a sentence against the Defendant in consideration of the following factors: (a) the Defendant: (b) the Defendant was at a disadvantage; (c) the instant crime was committed in large accidents; (d) the risk of causing personal and physical harm to many unspecified persons; (e) the Defendant was unable to recover damage; (d) the Defendant was punished several times due to violent crimes; and (e) the Defendant again committed the instant crime because it was not committed on one hand; (b) under favorable circumstances; (c) the Defendant led to the confession of the instant crime; (d) the Defendant was suffering from mental illness for a long time; and (e) the Defendant was prevented from committing the instant crime under the state of mental and physical disability for a long time; and (e) there were circumstances to take into account the background of the crime; and (e) the Defendant’s age, character, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime; and (e) the circumstances after the crime were committed.

In full view of the factors and sentencing criteria of the sentencing as expressed in the sentencing review process of the lower court, there is no change in the sentencing conditions to deem that the lower court’s judgment did not exceed the reasonable limit of its discretion and that it is unfair to maintain the lower court’s judgment as it is is.

Therefore, this part of the defendant's argument is justified.

유사 판례

-서울고등법원 2019.12.13 2019노2291

-서울고등법원 2020.01.16 2019노2376

-대전고등법원 2019.11.22 2019노356

-서울고등법원 2019.05.23 2019노10

-대구고등법원 2020.06.24 2020노131