사기등
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is unreasonable by the lower court’s imprisonment (eight months of imprisonment).
2. Ex officio determination: (a) the judgment of the court below ex officio omitted the pertinent provision on each of the crimes in paragraph (1) of this Article; and (b) there is an error of law by which the punishment of the defendant is imposed without adding the aggravated punishment of each of the attempted fraud and the crime of fraud recognized in the crime. Therefore, it cannot be maintained.
3. The judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the above grounds for ex officio reversal, and the judgment below is again ruled as follows after pleading.
Criminal facts
The summary of facts and evidence recognized by the court is the same as that of each corresponding column of the judgment below, and thus, they are cited in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.
Application of Statutes
1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act and Articles 352, 347 (1) and 30 of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, and Articles 347 (1) and 30 of the Criminal Act, respectively;
1. Among concurrent crimes, the reasons for sentencing under the former part of Article 37, Articles 38(1)2 and 50 of the Criminal Act recognize and reflects each of the crimes of this case from the investigation stage. The defendant acquired only about 50 million won out of the amount of fraudulent damage of this case, and the defendant first committed each of the crimes of this case as favorable sentencing factors for the defendant. Since each of the crimes of this case is in collusion with professional working loan holders, forged a disposal document lease contract and interviewed and interviewed bank exercising it, the crime of this case is very poor in quality of the crime. The amount of fraudulent damage of this case is a large amount of damage of 90 million won, which is not repaid, and all of the sentencing factors such as motive, means, circumstances after the crime of this case, the age, character, and environment of the defendant are considered as unfavorable sentencing factors for the defendant.