logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 전주지방법원 2018.10.24 2018노1193
도로교통법위반(음주운전)등
Text

All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The sentence of the lower court (eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. In light of the fact that the sentencing is determined within a reasonable and appropriate scope, taking into account the factors constituting the conditions for sentencing under Article 51 of the Criminal Act, based on the statutory penalty, and the fact that the sentencing is determined after the appellate court’s ex post facto nature, etc., it is reasonable to respect the first instance judgment in a case where there is no change in the conditions for sentencing compared to the first instance judgment, and the sentencing of the first instance judgment does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion. Although the first instance judgment is within the reasonable scope of discretion, it is desirable to reverse the first instance judgment on the sole ground that the sentence differs from the appellate court’s opinion, and to refrain from imposing a sentence that does not differ from the first instance judgment (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). In this case, the health team and the prosecutor of the first instance trial did not submit new data on sentencing, and even if the Defendant additionally submitted the normal data, there exists any particular change in the sentencing conditions compared with

In light of all the sentencing conditions indicated in the argument of this case, including the Defendant’s blood alcohol concentration and driving distance, the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, the process and motive leading to the instant crime, circumstances before and after the instant crime, criminal records, etc., the lower court’s punishment seems to be too easily or unreasonable, and thus, the Defendant’s assertion is without merit. The Prosecutor and the Defendant’s assertion are without merit.

3. Conclusion.

arrow