사기
The judgment below
Part concerning the second crime in the judgment shall be reversed.
For the crimes of No. 2 of the judgment of the defendant, four months of imprisonment.
1. Each sentence of the court below (the crime No. 1 in its holding: imprisonment with prison labor for 6 months and the crime No. 2 in its holding: imprisonment with prison labor for 6 months) against the defendant with the summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. It is reasonable to respect the part of the crime No. 1 in the judgment of the court below where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the judgment of the court of first instance, and where the sentencing of the first instance does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). Based on the aforementioned legal doctrine, there is no particular change in the sentencing conditions compared to the judgment of the court below because new materials on sentencing have not been submitted in the trial, and the sentencing revealed during the pleadings of the instant case exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion, and thus, it does not seem unfair.
Therefore, the defendant's argument of sentencing is without merit.
B. As to the part of the crime No. 2 of the decision of the court below, the crime of this case is deemed to have been obtained by deceiving the sum of KRW 69 million from the victim G without the intent or ability of the defendant to repay, and there is no criminal liability in light of the substance of the crime, and there is a criminal history of the same kind of crime against the defendant, and there
However, it is recognized that the court below's punishment against the defendant is too unreasonable, considering the following circumstances: (a) the defendant led to the confession of the crime of this case for the first time in the trial; (b) the defendant has agreed with G when the defendant was in the trial; (c) the defendant's child wants to take the defendant's wife against the defendant; (d) the social relation of the defendant is relatively clear; (e) the defendant's equity with the case of being tried together with the crime of fraud in which the judgment has already become final and conclusive; and (e) the defendant's age, sexual behavior, environment, etc., which are all the conditions for the sentencing specified in the argument of this case
Therefore, the defendant's argument of sentencing is justified.
3. If so, the judgment of the court below is the first crime.