Supreme Court held that employer-provided car benefits must be included in average monthly income for sentencing under Criminal Code Section 2.2.2.

The Supreme Court ruled that benefits provided by an employer, such as a car, must be factored into the calculation of average monthly income for sentencing purposes. The defendant argued that only cash income should count, but the court found that the value of the car benefit represents a real economic advantage. Consequently, the court determined that excluding such benefits would distort the true financial capacity of the offender, violating the principle of proportionality in sentencing.