사기
The judgment below
Part on the 2 to 6th judgment of the court is reversed.
As to the crime of 2 to 6 of the judgment of the defendant.
1. The decision of the court below on the summary of the grounds for appeal (the first crime: imprisonment with prison labor for 6 months, and the second or sixth crimes as decided: imprisonment with prison labor for 1 year and 6 months) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. Although there are extenuating circumstances, such as the confession of and reflects on the crime No. 1 in this part of the judgment, the fact that there is a family member to support the case at the same time with the final and conclusive judgment, the amount of damage reaches KRW 50 million, and the damage of the victim has not been recovered, etc., the defendant shall not be held strictly liable for the damage.
In addition, considering all of the sentencing conditions in the instant case, including the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, family relationship, living environment, motive, details and result of the crime, relationship with the victim, and circumstances after the crime, the lower court’s punishment is not unfair and appropriate.
The Defendant’s assertion of unreasonable sentencing is without merit.
B. According to the records as to the crimes of Articles 2 through 6 of the judgment, the Defendant was sentenced to one year of imprisonment for a crime of fraud in a public order branch of the Daejeon District Court on March 26, 2010, and was released on October 28, 2010 and the parole period has elapsed on January 6, 2011 in the execution of the sentence. (ii) The Defendant’s fraud committed against the Defendant’s victim I and K constitutes a single offense by combining each victim, and even if the remainder of the crime was committed after the end of the repeated offense period, the whole crime constitutes a repeated offense (see Supreme Court Decision 2011Do14135, Mar. 29, 2012); the Defendant’s fraud committed against the Defendant’s victim I and K constitutes a repeated offense within three years after the execution of the sentence was completed.
Nevertheless, there is an error of omission in the part of the judgment of the court below as to the crime Nos. 2 through 6 of the judgment of the court below as to the victim I and K.
The judgment below
The part on the judgment Nos. 2 through 6 is added.