beta
Text
Defendant
In addition, appeal by the person who requested probation order is dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. At the time of the instant crime, the Defendant and the person requesting probation order (hereinafter “Defendant”) asserted that he/she was in a state of mental disability due to drinking at the lower court, but the lower court did not make any determination on this.
B. The sentence of an unreasonable sentencing (four years of imprisonment) by the lower court is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. As to the Defendant case No. 1), the lower court rejected the Defendant’s claim on mental and physical disability by stating that “The Defendant and his defense counsel claimed that the Defendant was in a state of mental and physical disability under the influence of alcohol at the time of the instant crime. In light of the records of this case, it is reasonable to respect the Defendant’s claim on the grounds that the Defendant was aware of drinking at the time of the instant crime, but does not seem to have a lack of ability to make a decision or lacks ability to make a decision due to this, and thus, the above assertion is without merit.” In comparison with the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, the lower court’s aforementioned determination is justifiable. This part of the Defendant’s ground for appeal is without merit, and there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court on the Defendant’s allegation on unfair sentencing. 2) If the first instance court’s sentencing does not deviate from
(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). Based on the foregoing legal doctrine, there is no change in the sentencing conditions compared with the lower court’s failure to submit new sentencing data at the trial and the lower court. In full view of the factors revealed in the argument in the instant case, the lower court’s sentencing is too excessive and so it does not seem that the lower court exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.
The defendant's ground for appeal on this part is without merit.
B. Part of the case of probation order is the defendant's case.