대전지방법원 2019.07.04 2019노400



The judgment below

The part of the defendant's case shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

The judgment below

Of the lower judgment, the lower court.


1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The sentence of the court below (one year and three months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence is too uneased and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of unfair sentencing by the Defendant and the prosecutor, the Defendant’s assertion of unfair sentencing is disadvantageous to the Defendant in light of the frequency, method, and amount of damage, etc. of the instant fraud and embezzlement.

However, in full view of the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant recognized each of the instant offenses; (b) the Defendant agreed with the victim BK and BA at the time of the trial; (c) the Defendant additionally submitted the details of the Defendant’s payment of damages to some victims; (d) the amount of the damage from fraud and embezzlement appears to have been restored; and (e) each of the instant offenses is in the concurrent relationship between larceny of first head of the criminal facts as indicated in the judgment below that became final and conclusive and the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and the Defendant should be sentenced to punishment in consideration of equity with the case at the same time under Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act; and (c) the Defendant separately was sentenced to a fine with regard to the two offenses committed by summary; and (d) the motive, background, means and methods of the instant offense; (e) the Defendant’s age, character, career, environment, etc. as shown in the argument in the instant case.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing is without merit and prosecutor's assertion of unfair sentencing.

B. When the defendant files an appeal against a conviction regarding an application for a compensation order by the applicant for compensation by the original court, the compensation order pursuant to Article 33(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings is transferred to the appellate court along with the defendant's case, and thus, the part of the compensation order against the applicant for compensation among the original judgment is examined ex officio.