แนวทางในการพิพากษา : ศึกษาคำพิพากษาของศาลอาญาคดีทุจริตและประพฤติมิชอบ ภาค5 และภาค 6 ตั้งแต่ปี พ.ศ. 2560-2565

Abstract

This thesis aims to study the exercise of adjudicate discretion. The study issues are divided into 4 issues as follows: 1. In the case of the court rules that the defendant has committed an offense. 2. In the case of imposing punishment on the defendant. 3. In the case of the court grants a suspension of the sentence for the defendant. 4. In the case of the court decides to dismiss the case. The object of study is the Decision of the Criminal Court for Corruption and Misconduct Cases, Region 5 and Region 6. The study found that the judges did not exercise discretion in examining additional evidence. In the case that the plaintiff was the state, the judges tended to relied on the plaintiff's fact-finding documents. In the case that the plaintiff was the injured person, they relied on the evidence in the List of Evidence. In addition, it was found that in most cases, the judges imposed the minimum prison sentence for the offense and did not impose a fine on the defendant. However, if special circumstances appeared, they might impose a higher penalty. In cases where the judges considered that there are reasonable grounds to suspend the punishment, they would impose a fine on the defendant. Nevertheless, in most cases that related to bribery, they tended to consider the circumstances as severe. While if the offender was an accomplice. the judges tended to consider these circumstances less severe. Regarding the issue of the court's discretion in dismissing the case, it was found that when the plaintiff was the state, the judges mostly convicted the defendant. In cases that the plaintiff was the injured person, the judges dismissed almost all the cases.