beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable because the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable (the Defendant’s assertion on the recognition of the number of days of treatment is disputing the recognition of facts concerning the sentencing conditions, and it does not constitute a separate assertion of mistake of facts). 2. The Defendant recognized all of the instant crimes, the first offender, and agreed with the victim.
However, the crime of this case was committed by the Defendant, while driving a drinking string, caused an accident while driving the drinking, and the Defendant escaped without any rescue measures by causing the occurrence of an accident. As such, one of the two victims who suffered an injury due to the act was injured by 12 weeks, which is serious injury, such as a chest strekeing, etc., that requires the care of 12 weeks, and the nature of the crime is not weak (in response, the number of medical days of the victims whom the lower court published was exaggerated).
However, the decision of the doctor who issued the medical certificate was significantly wrong.
In full view of the fact that there is no other evidence to see that the victim D’s scarcitys were considerably important in itself, and that the victims were discharged as such even if they were 41 days and 6 days from the actual period of hospital treatment, it is difficult to conclude that the victims completely cured the victims. The victims also stated to the effect that they first been discharged from hospital treatment. ④ In the case of victim D, the victim’s 2 months from the date of the occurrence of the accident, and even around June 20, 2016, even around June 20, 2016, the Sentencing was still not completely congested, and it was almost rare, and that there was no statement from the sentencing investigator to the effect that the victims were continuously receiving physical treatment three times a week.
In addition, there is no change in circumstances that are conditions for sentencing in the trial compared with the original judgment.
This situation as well as this.