logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 제주지방법원 2016.11.24 2016노555
도로교통법위반(음주운전)
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant was in a state of mental disorder or mental disability at the time of committing the instant crime.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In light of the background, process, means and method of the instant crime, the Defendant’s act before and after the instant crime was committed, etc., the judgment of the lower court as to the defectiveness or mental disability cannot be deemed to have judged that the Defendant was aware of drinking alcohol at the time of the instant crime, but did not have or did not have the ability to discern things or make decisions.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is not accepted.

B. The Korean Criminal Procedure Act, which adopts the trial-oriented principle and the principle of directness on the assertion of unfair sentencing, ought to respect the determination of sentencing in cases where there exists no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the first instance court’s sentencing does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). It is recognized that the Defendant appears to have an attitude against the Defendant, recognizing the instant crime as a substitute.

However, it is necessary to strictly punish the driver's life and property as well as the driver's life and property.

The current Road Traffic Act stipulates that a person who has violated the prohibition clause of drinking driving twice or more shall be punished more strictly in the case of driving under the influence of alcohol again for the purpose of preventing driving under the influence of alcohol that threatens the safety of road traffic and ensuring the awareness of it.

Even before committing the instant crime, the Defendant has been subject to criminal punishment several times due to the violation of the Road Traffic Act, but continues to repeat drinking.

arrow