beta
Text
1. The judgment below is reversed.
2. The defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for ten months and a fine of one thousand won.
3. The defendant is above.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The sentence imposed by the lower court (one year of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, and one hundred and sixty hours of community service order) is too unreasonable.
B. The sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below is too uneasible and unreasonable.
2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor ex officio, the principle of prohibition of disadvantageous change is to guarantee the defendant's right to appeal or right to request a formal trial against the summary order. In the higher court or the case for formal trial appealed only for the defendant or for the defendant, the court shall not sentence more severe punishment than that already sentenced or notified to the defendant for the same criminal facts. The judgment on whether the sentenced sentence has been changed disadvantageous to the defendant shall be based on the seriousness of the criminal punishment under the Criminal Act. In addition, where the defendant appeals or formal trial is applied for concurrent crimes after the case other than the case for which the defendant has requested an appeal or formal trial, the judgment shall be based on whether the defendant is virtually disadvantageous to the defendant, considering the whole order, such as both concurrent punishment and additional punishment, suspension of execution, total number of days pending trial days, period of detention in the workhouse, and period of detention in the workhouse. Furthermore, where the other case for which the defendant has requested an appeal or formal trial and the case becomes concurrent crimes after the consolidation or examination, it shall not simply compare the punishment sentenced or the concurrent punishment.
(See Supreme Court Decision 2004Do6784 Decided November 11, 2004). However, according to the records of this case, among the judgment of the court below, the case No. 2013 is a case for which the defendant requested a formal trial against the summary order of KRW 1.5 million, and the court below concurrently deliberated on the case No. 2013DaMa262 and all of the above crimes.