(영문) 부산지방법원 2017.10.10 2017노2832 | 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) 부산지방법원 2017.10.10 2017노2832

교통사고처리특례법위반(치상)등

Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (one year of suspended sentence of six months, 40 hours of lectures for compliance driving, and 40 hours of community service) that the court below rendered is too unfasible and unreasonable.

2. Each of the crimes of this case is acknowledged that the Defendant, while driving a motor vehicle without a driver's license, took the victim who dried the crosswalk while driving the motor vehicle with the driver's license, and suffered bodily injury, such as the opening-up frame at the bottom of the framework that requires approximately 12 weeks medical treatment, and the criminal liability is not easy, and there was a history of punishment once due to a non-licenseless driving and drinking driving, and the injury level and degree are very heavy.

However, considering all of the sentencing conditions stated in the pleadings of the instant case, such as the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, motive, means and consequence of each of the instant crimes, etc., the sentence of the lower court is too uneasy and unreasonable, in light of the following factors: (a) the Defendant made a confession of all of the crimes, and there is no history of punishment heavier than the fine; (b) the vehicle was covered by an automobile comprehensive insurance policy; (c) the victim and the victim agreed smoothly with the victim; and (d) the victim wanted to have the Defendant’s wife; and (c) the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, motive, means and consequence

Therefore, prosecutor's assertion is without merit.

3. As such, the prosecutor’s appeal is dismissed under Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench. However, since it is obvious that the phrase “defensively” in Article 364(1)7 of the Criminal Procedure Act, among the judgment below, is a clerical error in the “defensive”, it is obvious that the phrase “defensively” is a clerical error

참조조문

-형사소송규칙 제25조 제1항

유사 판례

-부산지방법원 2017.11.17 2017노2993

-부산지방법원 2018.07.06 2018노1049

-대구지방법원 2016.08.17 2016노638

-부산지방법원 2017.10.24 2017노2606

-부산지방법원 2018.03.23 2017노3759