(영문) 제주지방법원 2016.08.18 2016노163 | 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) 제주지방법원 2016.08.18 2016노163

폭력행위등처벌에관한법률위반(집단ㆍ흉기등상해)

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The sentence of the lower court (the imprisonment of 10 months, the suspension of the execution of 2 years, and the community service order of 80 hours) is too unreasonable.

2. Under our criminal litigation law taking the trial-oriented principle and the principle of direct determination, where there exists no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect the determination of sentencing (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The defendant shows an attitude against the recognition of the instant crime, and the fact that the injured person does not want to be punished against the defendant by agreement with the victim is favorable to the defendant.

However, the defendant used dangerous articles to inflict an injury on the victim, and in light of the method and degree of damage, the nature of the crime is not good.

Before committing the instant crime, the Defendant has been subject to criminal punishment several times for violent crimes.

Such circumstances are disadvantageous to the defendant.

In full view of the above circumstances and the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, motive and background of the crime, means and method of the crime, and all the sentencing factors expressed in the instant records and trial process, including the circumstances after the crime was committed, the sentence imposed by the lower court shall not be deemed to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion or to be unfair because it was too excessive.

3. As such, the Defendant’s appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed under Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is so decided as per Disposition (Article 258-2(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, which is applicable to the crime in the application of the law of the lower judgment, is clearly omitted from the “Article 257(1) of the Criminal Act” next to the “Article 258-2(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and such ex officio correction is made pursuant to Article 25

참조조문

-형법 제257조 제1항

-형법 제258조의2 제1항

-형사소송규칙 제25조

참조판례

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

유사 판례

-제주지방법원 2016.07.21 2016노63

-제주지방법원 2016.06.23 2015노776

-제주지방법원 2016.09.29 2016노112

-제주지방법원 2016.07.14 2016노256

-제주지방법원 2017.02.02 2016노462