(영문) 수원지방법원 2014.09.22 2014노4248 | 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) 수원지방법원 2014.09.22 2014노4248

도로교통법위반(음주운전)등

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that the court below's imprisonment (eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The Defendant did not obtain a driver’s license, but is driving without a driver’s license.

The accident caused the accident, and the driver tried to drive without a license for drinking again on the draft of the fire.

Furthermore, the defendant has already been punished by a fine on several occasions due to driving without a license for drinking, and the repeated punishment has not been eradicated.

In addition, even though the Defendant had the ability to punish fines more than once due to the crime of fraud and embezzlement, the Defendant committed the crime of fraud and embezzlement in this case, and in light of the content of the crime, method and degree of damage, etc., the quality of the crime is very poor, and no agreement has been reached with the victim G.

In light of these circumstances, it is necessary to strictly punish the accused.

In addition, comprehensively taking account of the defendant's age, character and conduct, background and result of the crime, circumstances after the crime, etc., and all of the sentencing conditions in the records and arguments of this case, the defendant's mistake is seriously against himself, and H, the victim of the 2013 High-Ma2848 case, revoked the complaint at the time of investigation, and deposited one million won for the victim of the traffic accident in the first instance trial.

Even if the sentence of the court below is too unreasonable, it is not likely that the sentence of the court below is too unreasonable.

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

(However, since each "Article 148 (2) of the Road Traffic Act" stated in the column for the application of the law is apparent to be a clerical error in the "Article 148-2 (2) of the Road Traffic Act", it shall be corrected to "Article 148-2 (2) of the Road Traffic Act" in accordance with Article 25 of the

참조조문

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 2014.10.20 2014노4738

-수원지방법원 2014.12.01 2014노3613

-수원지방법원 2014.11.17 2014노5273

-수원지방법원 2014.06.02 2013노6484

-수원지방법원 2015.01.26 2014노6125