사기미수등
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than two years and six months.
Seized evidence 1 to 8 shall be confiscated, respectively.
1. The defendant asserts that, with respect to the summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment with prison labor, for a period of one year and six months, and forfeiture), the defendant is too unreasonable, and the prosecutor is too unhued and unreasonable.
2. The Defendant recognized each of the instant crimes.
The crime of fraud was committed in the attempted crime, and the victim J tried to clarify the defendant's intention not to punish the defendant in the trial.
Defendant has no criminal records of the same kind.
However, the crime of Bophishing fraud, such as the instant case, is very likely to be committed against many and unspecified persons in a planned and systematic manner, brushing many victims, and affecting society.
The Defendant directly performed a violation of the Telecommunications Business Act, such as mediating communications by another person, which has the nature of means to commit the fraud, and transmitting number change, etc., and the degree of the Defendant’s participation is small, such as leasing an office under the name of the Defendant for the said act.
In particular, the defendant is the first-A of the judgment of the court below.
When committing a crime as described in paragraph (1), one person "D" directly ceases to engage in a crime, and the other person write his/her writing on the NKa P, and only 1-B of the judgment of the court below.
It seems that he actively participated in the crime for economic interest, such as purchasing a core chip directly from that time.
The period of the defendant's participation in the crime is not shorter than the period, and there are many economic benefits gained thereby.
In light of the above circumstances, the sentencing of the court below is too weak in light of all the factors of sentencing as shown in the argument of this case, such as the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, motive and means of the crime, and circumstances after the crime.
Therefore, the prosecutor's argument is justified, and the defendant's argument is without merit.
3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is with merit, and the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is again decided as follows.