logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2016.06.17 2016노920
특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(도주차량)등
Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

However, the above punishment shall be imposed for three years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) is too unreasonable in light of the following: (a) the Defendant recognized his mistake and against himself; (b) the degree of injury to the victim of the traffic accident; (c) the damaged vehicle is not much serious; (d) the Defendant purchased the vehicle and did not complete the registration of transfer; and (e) the Defendant actually owns the vehicle; and (e) is scheduled to agree with the victim of the traffic accident.

2. The judgment that the defendant escaped even after causing a traffic accident, and that the motor vehicle was destroyed to conceal it is disadvantageous to the defendant.

However, it is important that the defendant reflects his mistake, and the degree of injury of the victim of the traffic accident is serious.

It cannot be said that the court below deposited one million won as compensation for damage, purchased a fire-fighting motor vehicle, but became a general motor vehicle fire-prevention crime as provided by Article 166(1) of the Criminal Act because it did not make a transfer registration. In full view of the defendant's age, sex, environment, motive and circumstance leading to the crime of this case, means and consequence, the circumstances before and after the crime, etc., the court below's punishment is unreasonable.

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

[Re-written judgment] The summary of the facts constituting an offense and evidence recognized by the court and the summary of the evidence are identical to the facts stated in the corresponding column of the judgment below, thereby citing them as they are in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Articles 81 subparag. 2 and 12 subparag. 1 of the former Automobile Management Act (amended by Act No. 13686, Dec. 29, 2015) regarding criminal facts and Articles 5-3 subparag. 2 and 5-3 subparag. 2 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (amended by Act No. 13686, Dec. 29, 201).

arrow