beta
Text
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendant 1) The Hyundai Motor Vehicle Launa (No. 17) and one D Launa vehicle (No. 18) seized after being provided for the crime causing the obstruction of performance of official duties as indicated in the judgment of the court below, are owned by the Defendant’s wife, and they cannot be confiscated because they belong to a person other than the Defendant. However, the court below held that the above articles belong to the Defendant and confiscated them. Thus, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts or misapprehending the legal principles on confiscation, which affected the conclusion of the judgment. 2) The sentence imposed by the court below on the Defendant by unjust sentencing is too unreasonable.
B. The sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below is too uneasible and unfair.
2. Determination
A. Regarding the Defendant’s assertion of misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, the lower court, based on the ground that the Hyundai Motor Vehicle Engine (No. 17) and one rocketing (No. 18), which is the seized object as indicated in the judgment of the lower court, are offered to commit a crime causing bodily injury resulting from the obstruction of performance of special duties as indicated in the judgment of the lower court, and do not belong to a person other than the Defendant, respectively, in accordance with Article 48(1)1 of the Criminal Act.
However, since the confiscation under Article 48 (1) 1 of the Criminal Code is voluntary, the issue of whether to confiscate even an article that meets the requirements for the confiscation is left to the court's discretion.
In light of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below (see Supreme Court Decision 2000Do515, Sept. 4, 2002) and the testimony of DH by the witness witness at the trial, the above rocketing vehicle and its key purchased around November 2005 by the Defendant’s husband and wife and registered in the name of DH, the Defendant’s wife’s wife, and the above rocketing vehicle were ordinarily used for their commuting to and from work while driving by the Defendant.