Defendant

All appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The punishment of the lower court (a fine of eight million won) is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. The Korean Criminal Procedure Act, which takes the trial-oriented principle and the direct principle, should respect the determination of sentencing in cases where there exists a unique area of the first instance court, and there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the first instance court’s sentencing does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion.

(Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). It is recognized that the Defendant shows an attitude against the Defendant, recognizing the instant crime, etc.

However, it is necessary to strictly punish the driver's life and property as well as the driver's life and property.

The current Road Traffic Act stipulates that a person who has violated the prohibition clause of drinking driving twice or more shall be punished more strictly in the case of driving under the influence of alcohol again for the purpose of preventing driving under the influence of alcohol that threatens the safety of road traffic and ensuring the awareness of it.

Before committing the instant crime, the Defendant has been subject to criminal punishment twice due to drinking driving.

In particular, on July 16, 2014, the Road Traffic Act was sentenced to two years of probation for the crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act, and on the 24th of the same month, the judgment became final and conclusive, and the crime of this case was committed in spite of the period of probation.

In full view of the above circumstances and the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, motive and background of the crime, means and method of the crime, and all the sentencing factors in the instant case’s records and the trial process, it cannot be deemed that the sentence imposed by the lower court exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion, or is too heavy or unreasonable.

3. In conclusion, the appeal filed by the defendant and the prosecutor is groundless, and Article 364 of the Criminal Procedure Act is not reasonable.