logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2013.10.10 2013노774
도로교통법위반(음주운전)등
Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. According to the records of the party members' scope of trial, the court below sentenced the defendant to dismiss the prosecution as to insult of the facts charged in this case and ordered the defendant to attend a law-abiding driving lecture for 8 months, 2 years and 40 hours after recognizing the remaining facts charged. As long as the defendant did not appeal, and only the prosecutor appealed on the guilty part on the grounds of unfair sentencing, the above dismissal of the public prosecution is separated and confirmed by the appeal period. Thus, the scope of trial of this court is limited to the conviction part of the judgment below.

2. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment for up to eight months, suspension of execution for two years and 40 hours) of the lower court’s sentence against the Defendant is too uneased and unreasonable.

3. The crime of this case, when the defendant driven a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol and was found to be in the crackdown on drunk driving, the defendant arrested a police officer who was engaged in the duty of regulating drunk driving repeatedly, and then was arrested as an offender in the act of interference with the driver's duty of operation of the police officer who was carrying the police patrol vehicle while carrying the police patrol lane, and attempted to gather a police officer, who was subject to the police officer's control from the police officer who was carrying the police patrol vehicle while carrying the police patrol vehicle, and was forced to take the police officer's blick, and did not go to this end, causing an injury by assaulting the pertinent police officer, and thus, the crime is not very good, and the defendant has a record of criminal punishment of each fine for drunk driving.

However, when the defendant was in the trial, all of the crimes of this case appeared to be against the defendant, the police officer who is the victim does not want the punishment of the defendant, and the criminal punishment of the defendant is not beyond the fine.

arrow