beta
(영문) 대구지방법원 2016.11.18 2016노2386

사기

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The sentence of one and a half years of imprisonment sentenced by the court below is too unreasonable.

2. The judgment of the court below recognized the Defendant as substitute for the instant facts charged, and it seems that the Defendant repaid some amount of damage at the court below, and the Defendant paid KRW 214 billion out of total amount of damage 453 billion to the victim H, P, and X.

Although it is recognized that the punishment should be determined in consideration of the equity in the case of fraud as stated in the first head of the crime of fraud as stated in the judgment of the court below, which became final and conclusive, the crime of this case is committed by deceiving a large amount of money exceeding KRW 930 million from a large number of victims, and the crime of this case is very bad, and the defendant did not agree with the victim F who acquired a total of KRW 480 million from a large number of victims, and the defendant did not agree with the police, and the defendant removed and arranged the account transaction statement to the effect that the F transferred the account to E and F by removing the account transaction statement (Article 185 of the evidence record No. 186 of the evidence record No. 2015Da5086). In light of the evidence and evidence No. 20166, Jun. 25, 2011, the evidence of this case is also written by the defendant prior to his death (the evidence No. 2016, Dec. 6, 2015).

In addition to the part against the victim F and the network E (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2015Da5086, Jul. 1, 2016) the Defendant was unable to repay a considerable portion of the damage amount of this case, and there was a history of having been sentenced to criminal punishment several times, including one time of punishment for the same crime of fraud, and two times of suspended execution, and there is no special change in circumstances to change the sentence of the lower court after the sentence of the lower court, and considering all the sentencing conditions of the instant case records and arguments, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, and circumstances after the crime.