beta
Text
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a year and six months, and a fine of 5,000,000 won.
The above fine shall be imposed on the defendant.
Reasons
1. The sentence imposed by the court below (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
2. The lower court, ex officio, applied Article 5-3(1)2 of the former Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (amended by Act No. 6664, Mar. 25, 2002) and Article 268 of the Criminal Act to the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes among the facts charged in the instant case.
However, Article 5-3(1)2 of the former Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (amended by Act No. 6664 of Mar. 25, 2002) provides that “When the driver of a vehicle who committed a crime causing bodily injury by negligence in the course of duty by traffic of a motor vehicle, etc. runs away without taking measures such as aiding the victim, he/she shall be punished by imprisonment for a limited term of not less than one year.” In the same case, when the said Act was amended by Act No. 6664 of Mar. 25, 2002 (amended by Act No. 6664 of May 26, 2002), “A person shall be punished by imprisonment for a limited term of not less than one year or by a fine not less than five million won but not more than 3
As such, the purport of adding a fine is to be deemed as an anti-sexual measure taken from the fact that the previous measure, which had to be punished as imprisonment, is more severe even in a case where the nature of the crime is insignificant even though the injury, degree of negligence, or the form and motive of escape are diverse. Therefore, Article 1(2) of the Criminal Act constitutes “when the punishment is more severe than the former Act by the amendment of the Act after the
Therefore, even though Article 5-3 (1) 2 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes as amended should have been applied to the above facts charged, the court below applied the Act prior to the amendment to regard the above facts charged and the remaining facts charged as concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act and rendered a single sentence. Therefore, the judgment of
Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act does not proceed to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant.