(영문) 부산지방법원 2018.10.12 2018노2900 | 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 2018.10.12 2018노2900

공무집행방해등

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The abstract of grounds for appeal (mental disorder and sentencing);

A. At the time of preventing each of the instant crimes with mental disorder, the Defendant was in a state of mental and physical weakness due to excessive drinking.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the following: (a) the process and process of committing a crime revealed by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court; (b) the means and method of committing a crime; and (c) the Defendant’s conduct before and after the crime was committed; and (d) the Defendant was in a state of lacking the ability to discern things or make decisions due to drinking or

shall not be deemed to exist.

The defendant's mental disorder is without merit.

B. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court’s judgment on the unfair argument of sentencing, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect such a case (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). It is favorable for the following reasons: (a) recognition of a crime; (b) the defrauded amount of the fraud crime is a small amount; and (c) the degree of interference with the performance of public duties is not very severe; and (d) the victim of the crime does not want the punishment

On the other hand, however, there has been a history of punishment including a number of punishment for the same crime, and there has been no more than two months since the release from the same crime for the same crime, which is a repeated crime that committed each of the crimes of this case, with high possibility of criticism and high risk of recidivism, agreement with the victim of the crime of fraud or failure to recover the damage, and there is a need to punish the crime of public authority, such as the crime that interferes with the performance of official duties of this case, in order to establish the state's legal order and eradicate the public peace.

The court below determined the punishment in consideration of the above circumstances, and newly set it in the trial.

참조판례

-대법원 2015. 7. 23. 선고 2015도3260 전원합의체 판결

유사 판례

-창원지방법원 2018.10.25 2018노1867

-인천지방법원 2017.01.20 2016노4879

-부산지방법원 2018.09.21 2018노2793

-인천지방법원 2017.03.03 2016노5154

-대구지방법원 2018.11.30 2018노3497