R v Sang Jin Park [2008] NSWDC 234

R v Sang Jin Park [2008] NSWDC 234

The seriousness of the offences, marked by planning, use of force, commission in the victim's home, and disregard for public safety, substantially aggravate the sentence. Although the offender had no prior record and was affected by depressive symptoms, these did not diminish his culpability or the need for general deterrence. The objective seriousness placed the offence above mid-range but below high-range, warranting a sentence above the standard non-parole period. Special circumstances justified some alteration to the parole ratio due to language and cultural hardship in custody.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
17 October 2008
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Sentencing After Jury Trial
Outcome
Offender sentenced to imprisonment; related charges disposed; AVO orders made
Legal Topics
['attempted Murder' 'malicious Damage by Fire' 'sentencing' 'aggravating and Mitigating Factors' 'domestic Violence']
['criminal Law'] ['attempted Murder' 'malicious Damage by Fire' 'sentencing' 'aggravating and Mitigating Factors' 'domestic Violence']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Sentencing After Jury Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['What is the appropriate sentence for attempted murder with aggravating circumstances?' 'How do psychiatric and personal factors affect sentencing?' 'What is the proper approach to concurrency and totality in sentencing for related offences?']

Ratio Decidendi

The seriousness of the offences, marked by planning, use of force, commission in the victim's home, and disregard for public safety, substantially aggravate the sentence. Although the offender had no prior record and was affected by depressive symptoms, these did not diminish his culpability or the need for general deterrence. The objective seriousness placed the offence above mid-range but below high-range, warranting a sentence above the standard non-parole period. Special circumstances justified some alteration to the parole ratio due to language and cultural hardship in custody.

Court Disposition

Offender sentenced to imprisonment; related charges disposed; AVO orders made

Orders

  • ['Count 1: 18 years imprisonment from 4 January 2007 to 3 January 2025, non-parole period 12 years to 3 January 2019' 'Count 3: 2 years imprisonment from 4 January 2007 to 3 January 2009, non-parole period 16 months to 3 May 2008, concurrent with Count 1' 'Count 4: 6 months imprisonment from 4 January 2007 to 3 July...