logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2020.06.18 2019노1983
청소년보호법위반
Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., both types of punishment) of the lower court (e.g., a fine of KRW 500,00) is deemed to be too uneased and unreasonable.

2. The determination of sentencing is based on the statutory penalty, with a discretionary determination that takes place within a reasonable and appropriate scope, taking into account the factors constituting the conditions for sentencing prescribed in Article 51 of the Criminal Act, based on which our Criminal Procedure Act, which takes the trial-oriented principle and the principle of directness, has a unique area of the first instance trial regarding the

In addition, considering these circumstances and the ex post facto nature of the appellate court, it is reasonable to respect the sentencing conditions in the event that there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, and to refrain from rendering a sentence that does not differ from the first instance court on the sole ground that the sentence of the first instance falls within the reasonable scope of discretion, even though the sentence of the first instance court is somewhat different from the opinion of the appellate court.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). The lower court determined a punishment within a reasonable scope by fully taking into account all the circumstances regarding the sentencing of a criminal defendant, and did not find any circumstances that may be specially considered in the trial.

(The circumstances cited by the prosecutor as the reasons for appeal are the elements that have already been determined by the court below and sufficiently taken into account. Also, the defendant is the first offender without any previous conviction. The defendant confirmed the age of one of the customers, and the defendant was adults, and the remaining behaviors did not confirm the age, and there are some parts to be taken into account in the circumstances of the instant case, and the defendant recognized that it was caused by his own fault and reflects the depth. As a result, the court below's suspended sentence for the defendant is reasonable discretion.

arrow