logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 울산지방법원 2020.11.12 2020노976
교통사고처리특례법위반(치상)등
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

The grounds for appeal by the defendant against the grounds for appeal are too heavy.

However, there is no particular change in sentencing conditions after appeal.

Even if the court below's reasons for sentencing together with all the circumstances and all the conditions of sentencing indicated in the records, it cannot be deemed that the sentence imposed by the court below is too unreasonable.

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The revision of the judgment of the court below ex officio requires the application of the law as follows.

1. Article 3 (1), Article 3 (2) (proviso) 2, 7, and 8 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, Article 268 of the Criminal Act, Article 148-2 (1) and Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act, Article 152 subparagraph 1 of the Road Traffic Act, Articles 152 and 43 of the Road Traffic Act, Articles 284 and 283 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts;

1. Punishment provided for in Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of ordinary concurrent crimes (a punishment imposed on a violation of the Road Traffic Act, a violation of the Road Traffic Act, a violation of the Road Traffic Act, or a violation of the Road Traffic Act with heavier punishment);

1. In regard to the crime of violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents by Selection of Punishment, imprisonment without prison labor and the crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act and the special intimidation, each choice shall be made;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2 and (2), and Article 50 of the Criminal Act [the lowest sentence shall be the concurrent crimes with the punishment determined for the severe special intimidation, but the minimum sentence shall be the concurrent crimes determined for the violation of the Road Traffic Act];

1. Article 53 or 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation (i.e., circumstances favorable to the defendant among the reasons for sentencing below);

arrow