logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.06.02 2017노1219
도로교통법위반(음주운전)
Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) of the lower court’s punishment (two months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination is an unfavorable circumstance that the Defendant again committed the instant crime even though he/she had been prior to a fine of two times due to drinking and a suspended sentence of one time due to driving.

On the other hand, the circumstances such as the Defendant’s mistake reflects in depth, the Defendant’s previous convictions due to drinking driving, 6 months of imprisonment finalized on August 2012, 1 year of suspended sentence, 1 year of suspended sentence, and 3 years or more, and the Defendant’s family members to support the instant crime are favorable to the Defendant.

In full view of the aforementioned circumstances and the criminal defendant’s age, sex, career, home environment, motive and means of crime, circumstances after crime, etc., and the sentencing conditions as shown in the instant records and arguments, the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable, and thus, the Defendant’s assertion is reasonable.

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is with merit, and the judgment below is ruled again after pleading as follows.

[Re-written judgment] The summary of criminal facts and evidence against the defendant recognized by the court is the same as that of each corresponding column of the judgment of the court below. Thus, it is also accepted by Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant legal provisions and Articles 148-2 (1) 1 and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act, the selection of punishment for a crime, and the selection of imprisonment;

1. Determination of the grounds for appeal for sentencing under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Da15488, Apr. 1, 201) of the Criminal Act (see, 2009Da1448, Apr. 1, 200

arrow