R v Kwon

Case [2004] NSWSC 146


CITATION: R v Kwon [2004] NSWSC 146
HEARING DATE(S): 13 February 2004
JUDGMENT DATE:
27 February 2004
JUDGMENT OF: Dowd J at 1
DECISION:
CATCHWORDS: Manslaughter - Plea of Guilty - Sentencing - Extent of Discount - Reduction of Non-Parole Period
CASES CITED: R v Wong; R v Leung [1999] 48 NSWLR 340
R v Rushby [1977] 1 NSWLR 594 at 597
R v Radich [1954] NZLR 86
R v Blacklidge, unreported, NSWCCA, 12 December 1995
R v Grenenger [1999] NSWSC 380
R v Wilson [1999] NSWSC 1235
R v Risteski [1999] NSWSC 1248
R v Thompson; R v Houlton (2000) 49 NSWLR 383
R v Arnott [2001] NSWCCA 497
R v Speechley (2002) 133 A Crim R 26

PARTIES :

Regina
Yong Gap Kwon
FILE NUMBER(S): SC 70062/03
COUNSEL: (Crown) W. Robinson QC
(Prisoner) P. Boulten
SOLICITORS: (Crown) D. Kelly
(Prisoner) V. Murphy

- 11 -

      IN THE SUPREME COURT
      OF NEW SOUTH WALES
      COMMON LAW DIVISION

      Dowd J

      Friday 27 February 2004

      070062/03 - REGINA v YONG GAP KWON

      SENTENCE

1 HIS HONOUR: Yong Gap Kwon stands for sentence today having entered a plea of guilty to Manslaughter. The prisoner was originally charged with murder at Burwood Local Court, but on arraignment on 6 November 2003 before this Court, the prisoner pleaded not guilty to Murder but guilty to Manslaughter, which plea the Crown accepted in full satisfaction of the indictment. He was remanded for sentence until 13 February 2004.

2 The prisoner was arrested on 14 February 2003 and granted conditional bail on that day. He did not apply for bail when submissions on sentence were taken and evidence tendered before me on 13 February 2004, and he has been remanded in custody for sentence. I have taken that into account in fixing the date for commencement of sentence.

      Facts

3 The facts are that on the evening of 8 February 2003, the deceased, an employee of the prisoner, had dinner with the prisoner at a restaurant in Beamish Street, Campsie. Also present were the wife of the prisoner, Wnol Yong, his brother and another employee. Some time around the middle of the evening, the entire party left that restaurant and went to a music studio in Campsie.

4 The deceased, Yong and another male arrived at another restaurant in Campsie about 1.20am. The three seated themselves and ordered a bottle of whisky. The unknown male left shortly thereafter. At around 2am the prisoner entered the restaurant, yelling and swearing at Yong. This continued for some little time before the three left the restaurant for Beamish Street, Campsie. Shortly thereafter, the prisoner again commenced yelling at Yong.

5 The prisoner then punched the deceased to the upper body or his head at least three times before the deceased fell to the ground. The deceased stood up again and made his way to a nearby bench where he sat down. The prisoner also sat on the bench for a short while before getting up, and commenced punching the…

Continue reading R v Kwon

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
R v Kwon [2004] NSWSC 146
Case
[2004] NSWSC 146
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case involved the respondent, Kwon, who pled guilty to manslaughter. The matter was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales, where the court was tasked with sentencing Kwon for his crime. The key issue before the court was the appropriate extent of discount to be applied to the non-parole period in light of Kwon's guilty plea and other relevant factors.

The court considered the principles established in prior case law, which provide for a discount to the non-parole period when a defendant pleads guilty, as an admission of guilt is seen as a mitigating factor. The court examined the nature and circumstances of the offence, including the level of culpability and the impact on the victim. The court also considered the respondent's background, including his age, criminal history, and remorse. The court's analysis involved a careful balancing of these factors to determine the appropriate extent of the discount.

In determining the appropriate discount, the court found that a significant reduction was warranted due to the respondent's early guilty plea and the absence of any aggravating factors. The court ultimately decided that a 25% discount was appropriate, resulting in a non-parole period of 12 years. The court took into account the need for deterrence and the protection of the community, while also considering the respondent's potential for rehabilitation. The final orders of the court reflected this determination, with the sentencing reflecting the appropriate discount and non-parole period.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.