logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 제주지방법원 2016.06.16 2016노141
폭력행위등처벌에관한법률위반(집단ㆍ흉기등폭행)
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the reasons for appeal (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Under our criminal litigation law, which takes the trial-oriented principle and the principle of direct determination, there exists no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and where the first instance judgment does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect such a case (Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). The fact that the Defendant appears to have an attitude to recognize and reflect the instant crime, and that the injured party does not want the punishment of the Defendant by agreement with the victim, etc. is favorable to the Defendant.

However, the crime of this case is not very good in light of its circumstances, means, and contents.

The Defendant had been punished several times for the same crime, and, in particular, was prosecuted for a crime of intimidation, which is a dangerous object, prior to the instant crime, and was sentenced to six months of imprisonment on April 27, 2012 for violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a group, deadly weapons, etc.) and committed the instant crime even after having been released on July 31, 2012, even during the period of repeated crime.

These points are disadvantageous to the defendant.

In full view of each of the above circumstances, comprehensively taking account of the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, motive and background of the instant crime, means and method of the instant crime, and all of the sentencing factors expressed in the process of the trial and records, such as the circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentence imposed by the lower court is deemed to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion, or to be too unfair.

3. If so, 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.

arrow