beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable that the sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
2. The judgment recognizes the Defendant’s mistake, the Defendant’s disposal of owned vehicles, and shows that he would not drive a motor vehicle again while returning a temporary driver’s license, and the recent years have no record of being punished for the same kind of crime. However, the Defendant has a history of traffic accidents including imprisonment with prison labor for a crime that runs away without aiding the victim after causing a traffic accident and being subject to suspended execution, and in particular, there have been two times the history of causing a traffic accident while driving a motor vehicle. Nevertheless, the Defendant was under the influence of driving a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol concentration of 0.13% on May 29, 2013, and was under the influence of driving a motor vehicle under the influence of a low influence on May 30, 2013.
Taking into account the circumstances that led to the instant crime, such as the motive and circumstance leading up to the instant crime, the circumstances before and after the instant crime, the Defendant’s age, character and behavior, environment, occupation, family relation, etc., such as the state of salvance (0.175% of blood alcohol concentration), and driving under the influence of alcohol, etc., that may be somewhat weak, and repeated driving behavior that may cause a serious accident, etc., the punishment imposed by the lower court cannot be deemed to be unfair because it is too unreasonable.
3. As such, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since it is without merit.
However, among the reasoning of the judgment below, the applicable column of statutes
1. Since the phrase “the proviso of Article 42” in the part of concurrent crimes is apparent to be a clerical error, it shall be corrected to ex officio delete it pursuant to Article 25(1) of the Regulations on Criminal Procedure.
.