전자금융거래법위반등
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed;
2. Of the lower judgment, the part of the compensation order against B, the applicant for compensation, is as follows.
1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the grounds for appeal (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
2. The judgment below rejected C’s application for compensation, and since the applicant cannot file an objection against the judgment dismissing the application for compensation pursuant to Article 32(4) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, the above application for compensation became final and conclusive immediately, the part which dismissed the above application for compensation among the judgment below is excluded from the scope of the judgment of this court.
A. The Defendant’s judgment on the Defendant’s assertion of unfair sentencing is a favorable circumstance for the Defendant, which is favorable to the Defendant, such as the following: (a) the Defendant’s mistake was recognized in the trial of the lower court; (b) agreed with the victim C, Q; (c) partially repaid the amount of damage to the victim G, J, and B; and (d) each of the instant crimes was committed on September 13, 2018 by imprisonment with prison labor for which the two-year judgment of suspended execution became final on September 13, 2018 and by the latter part of Article 3
However, considering the circumstances and methods of each of the instant crimes, damage amount, etc., there is no circumstance that the crime is not good in light of the nature of the crime, and additional damage recovery was made in the trial even though the damage amount was high. In full view of the unfavorable circumstances such as the Defendant’s criminal records multiple times of punishment for fraud, and other various circumstances, including Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., it cannot be deemed that the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable to the extent that it is deemed that the Defendant exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.
Therefore, the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing is without merit.
B. When the defendant, ex officio, files an appeal against conviction regarding the part of the compensation order against B, the compensation order shall be issued to the appellate court along with the defendant's case, even if there is no objection to the compensation order.