2007Do973 Violation of the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes Act (Tax)

Defendant

Defendant

Attorney Lee Jae-sik

Seoul High Court Decision 2007No1790 Decided November 1, 2007

April 10, 2008

The appeal is dismissed.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

In the event that both imprisonment and a fine are to be imposed concurrently for a crime, the sentence to be mitigated pursuant to the latter part of Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act shall be mitigated, and the sentence to be mitigated shall not be mitigated, and it shall not be deemed unlawful.

In light of these legal principles, the court below's decision that maintained the first instance court's decision that reduced the punishment under the latter part of Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act while imposing both imprisonment and fine on the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (tax) as stated in the defendant's judgment is just and there is an error of law by misunderstanding the legal principles on statutory mitigation under Articles 39 (1)

shall not be subject to an appeal.

Supreme Court Decision 96Do3466 Decided August 26, 1997 cited in the ground of appeal is related to discretionary mitigation in cases where punishment of imprisonment and fine should be imposed concurrently with respect to one crime, and it is not appropriate to apply in this case.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Lee Hong-hoon

Justices Kim Hwang-sik

Justices Ahn Dai-hee