logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2015.05.14 2015노371
폭력행위등처벌에관한법률위반(상습재물손괴등)
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment with prison labor) of the lower court against the Defendant is too unreasonable for six months.

2. There are extenuating circumstances, such as the fact that the Defendant made a confession of a crime and reflects the mistake while making a judgment on the grounds of appeal, the fact that the Defendant caused the instant case by contingency under the influence of alcohol, the fact that the injury is relatively minor, and the victim wanted to find the Defendant’s wife against the Defendant by agreement with the victim.

However, on the other hand, the defendant has been punished more than 30 times for a crime of the same or different kind in this case, and in particular, on April 17, 2013, three years of imprisonment with prison labor for a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Drivers, Violence, etc.) and three years of suspended execution.

9. 25. 25. The above suspended sentence becomes null and void upon being sentenced to six months of imprisonment for a violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (Habitual destruction and Damage, etc.) and the judgment became final and conclusive on October 3 of the same year. On September 26, 2014, the execution of the sentence was terminated and again committed the instant crime during the period of repeated crime. The instant crime is punishable by imprisonment with prison labor for a limited term of at least one year, and six months, which the court below sentenced by a limited term of more than one year, is the lowest within the period of punishment, and other conditions of sentencing prescribed in Article 51 of the Criminal Act, including the Defendant’s age, character and behavior, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, circumstances after the crime, etc., are considered appropriate, and it does not seem unfair.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow