사기
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. The fact that the defendant's judgment on the grounds for appeal (an unjust assertion) recognizes the instant crime and is contrary to the recognition of the instant crime, the fact that part of the mobile phone price obtained by deceit in the original judgment appears to have been repaid, and the fact that equity should be considered with the case where the judgment was rendered together with the crime that became final and conclusive, etc., is to be considered in favor of the defendant.
However, even though the defendant was sentenced to imprisonment for 6 months on October 28, 201 and 2 years on probation, he/she committed the instant crime during the probation period, and reached an agreement with the victim up to the trial.
In light of the circumstances, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, family relationship, circumstances leading up to a crime, means and consequence, and other various sentencing conditions indicated in the record, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, family relation, circumstances leading up to a crime, etc., the lower court cannot be deemed to be unfair because the Defendant’s punishment (fine 1.5 million won) is too unreasonable.
2. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.
However, in the application of the law of the lower judgment, the phrase “1. In the case of detention in the workhouse” under Articles 70 and 69(2) of the Criminal Act is apparent that the phrase “Article 70 and 69(2) of the former Criminal Act” is a clerical error under Articles 70 and 69(2) of the former Criminal Act, and thus, it is apparent that it is a clerical error under Article 25(1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure. Thus, the ex officio correction
.