횡령
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.
However, the period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) of the lower court’s sentence (10 months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
2. The instant crime was committed by the Defendant for personal consumption and embezzlement of KRW 100 million, which the Defendant had been under custody for the victim, and is disadvantageous to the Defendant, such as the motive, method, etc. of the crime, a large amount of damage, and the fact that the Defendant did not receive a letter from the victim.
However, in full view of all other circumstances that are favorable to the defendant's age, sex behavior, environment, circumstance of crime, circumstance after crime, etc., such as the fact that the defendant recognized the crime of this case in the trial of the party, the defendant's punishment of 100 million won in the trial seems to be excessive recovery from damage by depositing the victim as the person who was the victim in the trial of the party, the fact that there is no record of punishment for the same kind of crime, the balance with the case where the judgment is to be rendered simultaneously with the crime of destroying property as stated in the judgment of the court below, and the time during which the defendant's life would have been anticipated to have been reflected through detention for about 2 months, the court below's improper assertion on the defendant's punishment is reasonable, since the court below's punishment is too too unreasonable.
3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the defendant's appeal is with merit, and the judgment below is ruled again as follows.
[Grounds for a new judgment] Criminal facts and summary of evidence recognized by this court are as follows: (a) deleted “the Defendant’s partial statement of 1.1 in court” in the column for the evidence of the lower judgment; and (b) added “the Defendant’s oral statement of 1.1 in court” as stated in the corresponding column of the lower judgment; and (c) thus, they are cited in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.
Application of Statutes
1. Relevant Article 355 (1) of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, and the choice of imprisonment;
1. Article 37 of the Criminal Code for the Treatment of Concurrent Crimes