logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2018.09.06 2018노907
특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(위험운전치사상)등
Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The sentence imposed by the court below on the summary of the grounds for appeal (for four months of imprisonment, one year of suspended sentence, and 40 hours of order to attend a compliance driving) is too uneased and unreasonable.

2. There is no change in the terms and conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and where the sentencing of the first instance does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect such a case (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). Drinking driving is a crime that may have a significant harm to an unspecified person, and is considerably likely to pose a significant social risk. In fact, the Defendant actually caused a traffic accident due to drinking driving, injured the victim, thereby causing the danger thereof, and the risk thereof was realized. At the time of the instant crime, the alcohol level of the Defendant’s blood alcohol level at 0.135% at the time of the instant crime was committed.

However, the defendant recognized his mistake, there is no criminal punishment against the defendant at the time of the crime of this case, and the degree of injury of the victim is relatively minor.

The circumstances alleged by the prosecutor on the grounds of appeal are already considered in the sentencing process of the original court, and there is no new change in circumstances that make it possible for the prosecutor to change the sentence of the original court in the trial.

When comprehensively considering the sentencing conditions, such as the Defendant’s age, background of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, as shown in the arguments of the lower court and the lower court, it cannot be deemed that the lower court exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion imposed by the lower court or is too unreasonable.

3. According to the conclusion, the prosecutor’s appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow