사기미수등
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment with prison labor) by the lower court is too unreasonable.
2. According to the records of ex officio determination, the defendant, while denying the crime of this case, can be found to have led to the judgment of the court below that led to the confession of each crime of this case.
Therefore, among the facts charged in this case, the necessary mitigation or exemption of punishment should be made in accordance with Articles 157 and 153 of the Criminal Act. In this respect, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained any more.
3. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing, and the judgment below is reversed and it is again decided as follows.
【Discrimined Judgment】 Criminal facts and summary of evidence recognized by this court are identical to the description of each corresponding column of the reasoning of the judgment below except for adding “1.1. Defendant’s oral statement” to the summary of evidence, and thus, they are cited as it is in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.
Application of Statutes
1. Relevant Articles 352 and 347 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense and Article 156 of the Criminal Act;
1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act among the crimes of false accusation;
1. Selection of each sentence of imprisonment;
1. Articles 157, 153, and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act (i.e., the crime of false accusation because of the confession)
1. Of concurrent crimes, with respect to a person who intends to commit a crime without reason for sentencing as prescribed in the former part of Article 37, Articles 38(1)2 and 50 of the Criminal Act (aggravating concurrent crimes with the punishment heavier than the punishment) among concurrent crimes, it would not only undermine the legal stability of the crime to be avoided by causing pain and danger resulting in criminal punishment, etc., but also undermine the appropriate exercise of the State’s judicial function.