logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 2019.10.17 2019노1167
뇌물공여등
Text

All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (i) the sentence imposed by the lower court on the charge of offering of a bribe as of September 13, 2016 to Defendant A (hereinafter “Defendant A”), the imprisonment of one month for the crime of offering a bribe as of September 13, 2016, the imprisonment of eight months for the remaining crimes, two years for the suspended execution of each of the above punishment, the community service order of 120 hours, and the imprisonment of eight months, the suspended execution of two years for the above punishment, the community service order of two years, and the surcharge of 6,618,

2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). Circumstances alleged by the Defendants as grounds for appeal appear to have been sufficiently considered in the course of sentencing of the lower court. There are no special circumstances or changes in circumstances that may change the sentencing of the lower court after the lower judgment.

In particular, the lower court seems to have sentenced the Defendants to a suspended sentence on the premise that each of 120 hours community service order should be implemented, taking into account various sentencing conditions.

Since the community service order may be implemented through weekends or holidays in consultation with the competent probation office, it is not impossible to implement the community service order to the extent that it does not interfere with the livelihood of the community service provider.

(In this process, the defendants' assertion that the sentencing of the court below is unfair is not acceptable.

3. As such, the Defendants’ appeal is without merit, and all of them are dismissed under Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow