logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2014.08.13 2014노2020
특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(도주차량)등
Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than two years and six months.

However, for three years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

The Defendant asserts that the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable as the grounds for appeal of this case are too unreasonable.

In full view of all the sentencing conditions shown in the records and arguments of this case and the fact that the defendant was sentenced to a fine of 700,000 won by a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act around 1999, there are no criminal records of the same kind except for those sentenced to a fine of 700,000 won, and the vehicle driven by the defendant is covered by the comprehensive insurance and that the victim

Therefore, since the appeal by the defendant is well-grounded, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act and the following is ruled again

Criminal facts

The summary of the evidence and the facts charged by the defendant and the summary of the evidence recognized by the court are the same as the corresponding column of the judgment below, and thus, they are quoted in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Article 5-3 (1) 1 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, Article 268 of the Criminal Act, Article 148-2 (2) 2 and Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act concerning the relevant criminal facts, the selection of punishment,

1. As to the crime of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, the punishment by imprisonment and the punishment by imprisonment for each violation of the Road Traffic Act;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Mitigation of discretionary mitigation under Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 201Da1548, Apr. 1,

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspension of execution;

arrow