logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 2020.08.20 2020노1054
도로교통법위반(음주운전)
Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 7,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment and two months of probation, two years of probation, 120 hours of community service order, and 40 hours of attendance order) imposed by the court below is too unreasonable.

2. The defendant's records of punishment twice due to drinking driving (2004, 2005), and the fact that the blood alcohol concentration at the time of the crime of this case is high is disadvantageous to the defendant.

On the other hand, there are no previous criminal records for a period exceeding 15 years from the time of the crime of this case from the above two times to the time of the crime of this case, the defendant's distance operated at the time of the crime of this case is short and did not cause an accident, and the defendant seems to have an attitude against the defendant while recognizing the crime of this case.

Examining the aforementioned conditions of sentencing in the records and arguments of this case, such as equity with the sentencing of similar cases similar to the defendant's circumstances, and the age, character and conduct, environment, health conditions, the circumstances of the crime, the circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentence of the court below is deemed unfair because it is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing is justified.

3. Since the appeal by the defendant is well-grounded, the judgment below is reversed pursuant to Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the appeal by the defendant is again ruled as follows.

[Discied reasoning of the judgment below] Criminal facts and summary of evidence recognized by the court is identical to the facts constituting a crime and summary of evidence, and thus, the summary of evidence is identical to each corresponding column of the judgment below. Thus, it is acceptable in accordance with Article 369

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Article of the Act and Articles 148-2 (3) 2 and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act, the selection of fines for criminal facts, and the selection of fines;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order;

1. Scope of applicable sentences under law: Fines of five million won to ten million won;

2. The defendant shall be sentenced prior to a ruling of sentence;

arrow