(영문) 수원지방법원 2020.10.15 2020노1797 | 리걸엔진

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 수원지방법원 2020.10.15 2020노1797

공무집행방해등

Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The sentence of the first instance judgment (the fine of KRW 3,00,000) against the accused in the summary of the grounds for appeal is too unfasible and unreasonable.

2. In a case where 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, it is reasonable to respect it.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). In light of the following: (a) the nature of the crime of obstruction of the performance of official duties and the need for strict punishment; (b) the negative effect of the punishment against the principal offender; and (c) the criminal records of the Defendant, etc., the prosecutor’s assertion that the sentencing of the judgment of the first instance court, which sentenced a fine of a relatively lower amount, is unreasonable is unreasonable.

However, considering the circumstances favorable to the defendant specified in the judgment of the first instance court as well as the situation favorable to the defendant and the mother of the defendant who is to well care for the defendant, the sentencing preference of the court of the first instance has been fundamentally erroneous.

It is difficult to deem that the assessment of sentencing conditions has reached the degree of confluence.

Defendant

Even though the defendant has committed a similar type of crime repeatedly so far, it is necessary to know that he has been faced with several times due to the disposition of suspension of indictment or minor fine.

In addition, if the promise in this case is not observed and the crime is committed again due to the adjustment of appraisal in the future, it should be noted that the personal death or mental illness of the defendant can no longer be a failure of the crime committed by the defendant.

In light of the following: (a) there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court because new sentencing data have not been submitted in the trial; and (b) the background and result of the instant crime; (c) the Defendant’s age, character and conduct; and (d) various conditions of sentencing as shown in the instant records and arguments, such as the circumstances after the instant crime was committed; and (d) the Defendant’s age, character

참조판례

-대법원 2015. 7. 23. 선고 2015도3260 전원합의체 판결

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 2020.08.27 2020노2150

-수원지방법원 2020.11.05 2020노2578

-수원지방법원 2020.11.12 2020노2875

-수원지방법원 2020.10.15 2020노2549

-서울서부지방법원 2021.04.13 2020노1379