logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2016.04.28 2016노177
상습특수절도등
Text

Defendant

All A and prosecutor appeals are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The punishment of Defendant A against the Defendant (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence against Defendant B (eight months of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, observation of protection, and community service work 160 hours) of the lower court is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The lower court seems to have sentenced Defendant A to one year and six months of imprisonment in consideration of the unfavorable circumstances and favorable circumstances against the Defendant.

In full view of the matters on the conditions of sentencing and the applicable sentences in the trial, the sentencing judgment of the court below exceeded the reasonable bounds of its discretion.

There is no circumstance that the lower court’s sentencing is deemed unfair or that it is deemed unfair to maintain the judgment (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). In addition, considering the circumstances leading to the instant crime, the circumstances following the instant crime, the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, etc., the lower court’s sentence is appropriate and too unreasonable, and the Defendant’s assertion is groundless.

B. The prosecutor (defendant B) appears to have sentenced to 8 months of imprisonment, 2 years of suspended execution, 160 hours of probation, and 160 hours of community service, taking into account the unfavorable circumstances against the Defendant and favorable circumstances.

In full view of the matters on the conditions of sentencing and the applicable sentences in the trial, the sentencing judgment of the court below exceeded the reasonable bounds of its discretion.

There is no circumstance that the lower court’s determination is unfair or that it is deemed unfair to maintain the sentencing (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). In addition, considering the circumstances leading to the instant crime, the circumstances following the instant crime, the Defendant’s age, sexual behavior, environment, etc., the lower court’s sentence is appropriate, and is too unreasonable, even in light of various sentencing conditions as shown in the records and arguments in the instant case.

arrow