beta
Text
Defendant
C All appeals filed by both C and prosecutor are dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendant C’s punishment (ten months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
B. The lower court’s punishment against the Defendants by the prosecutor (Defendant A: 8 months of imprisonment, 2 years of probation, 2 years of probation, community service, 120 hours of community service, 40 hours of pharmacologic, Defendant B’s imprisonment, 10 months of probation, 2 years of probation, 2 years of protection, community service observation, 120 hours of community service, 40 hours of pharmacologic, Defendant C’s 10 hours of lectures, and 10 months of imprisonment) is unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. In the instant case, the Defendant A of the Prosecutor’s criminal act of determining the illegality of sentencing with respect to the Defendant A of the instant crime is a mass purchase of an Axial oxide, which is a hallucinogenic substance, and selling it to many and unspecified persons, and the nature of the crime is not very good, and there is a need to strictly punish such an act, and to have a light on the trend of spreading “the punishment against the sea” centered on 20 to 30 major units.
However, considering the following circumstances, Defendant A’s confessions all of the instant crimes and reflects the depth of the instant crimes, there is no record of criminal punishment as a criminal act, and there is no benefit from the instant crime, and other circumstances, such as Defendant A’s age, sexual conduct, environment, motive, means, and consequence of the instant crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment is too uneasy and unreasonable, and thus, the Prosecutor’s aforementioned assertion is groundless.
B. The instant crime of this case with regard to the prosecutor’s improper assertion of sentencing against Defendant B is not limited to the inhalement of hallucinogenic substances by Defendant B, and is sold or offered to a third party. Considering the frequency and quantity of sales, adverse effects of drug crimes on society, etc., the crime is not good, and it is also necessary to strictly punish the crime.
However, Defendant B recognizes all of the crimes of this case and reflects their depth, has no criminal record of suspension of execution or more, and has no criminal record of the same kind of crime.
Although it appears that it was committed for the purpose of punishing living expenses and school expenses, it is generated thereby.