(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2017.03.30 2016노1084

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) 서울남부지방법원 2017.03.30 2016노1084

도로교통법위반(음주운전)등

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable that the sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant (ten months of imprisonment, two years of suspended sentence, two years of probation observation, and forty hours of instruction in compliance driving) is too unreasonable.

2. The circumstances favorable to the Defendant that the Defendant recognized all of the instant crime and paid the taxi fee to the victim interfering with the business.

However, the Defendant was sentenced to a summary order of KRW 2 million on November 5, 2010, KRW 4 million on July 15, 2014, KRW 4 million on October 14, 2014, and KRW 4 million on September 1, 2014, and was sentenced to a summary order of KRW 1 million on September 1, 2008 due to interference with business affairs, and was sentenced to a summary order of KRW 1 million on several occasions.

In addition, the Defendant was punished on April 23, 2015 for driving without a license, and the Defendant was driving without a license for drinking alcohol in this case for one year after being punished.

In light of the above defendant's non-exclusive driving habits, the defendant is highly likely to repeat the crime.

In addition, the defendant did not agree with the victim who interfered with business to the trial of the party.

In addition, considering the various circumstances asserted by the Defendant on the grounds of appeal, the lower court’s punishment is too unlimited and unreasonable, considering the following factors: (a) the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, motive for committing the crime, etc. as well as the circumstances favorable to or unfavorable to the Defendant; and (b) the reasons for sentencing of the lower court.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is without merit and it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. However, the "Article 60 (3) of the Juvenile Act" in the "Suspension of Execution of 1." applicable to the law of the court below is obvious that it is a clerical error, and thus it is deleted ex officio in accordance with Article 25 of the Regulation on Criminal Procedure.

참조조문

-소년법 제60조 제3항

-형사소송규칙 제25조

유사 판례

-의정부지방법원 2018.06.26 2018노1199

-수원지방법원 2018.10.30 2018고단5421

-수원지방법원 성남지원 2021.01.14 2020고단3293

-수원지방법원 여주지원 2017.06.02 2017고단313

-서울남부지방법원 2017.11.30 2017고단5588