logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2015.10.07 2014노2220
특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(도주차량)등
Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. According to the evidence submitted by a mistake prosecutor, the court below found the defendant not guilty of the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, on the ground that it is not necessary to take relief measures since it is found that the extent of damage was insignificant after the victim's escape although the defendant caused an accident as stated in the judgment of the court below (hereinafter "the accident of this case") and the victim escaped as it was necessary to take relief measures such as injury.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (three million won of a fine) is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In light of the degree of shock caused by the instant accident, the degree of damage to the vehicle, and the movement of the victims after the accident, the lower court acquitted the victims of the instant accident with the purport that it cannot be deemed that the Defendant was in need of measures, such as aiding the victims, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. In full view of the circumstances indicated by the lower court and the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, the lower court’s aforementioned determination is justifiable.

Therefore, it is difficult to accept the prosecutor’s above assertion on a different premise.

B. Although the victims of the allegation of unfair sentencing, etc. are disadvantageous to the disadvantage of the defendant, such as inducing the vehicle of the defendant escaping from the argument of unfair sentencing, the fact that the defendant recognized his mistake and reflects against his will, the fact that the defendant agreed with the victims, and the fact that there was no record of criminal punishment except for the punishment of a fine due to the violation of the Road Traffic Act in 2012, etc. are favorable to the defendant. In addition, there are various arguments in the instant case, such as the background of the instant crime, circumstances after the instant crime, the defendant's age, character and behavior, and environment.

arrow