사기
All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.
1. The decision of the court below on the summary of the grounds of appeal (defendant A: imprisonment with prison labor for 6 months, Defendant B: imprisonment with prison labor for 6 months, suspended execution for one year, and community service order for 80 hours) is too unreasonable.
Defendant
B also asserted the grounds for appeal of mistake of facts, but the above argument was withdrawn on the second trial date of the trial of the first instance.
2. In the case of Defendant A, the fact that it appears to be against the Defendant’s criminal act and that it appears to be against the Defendant’s criminal act; that the Defendant repaid 10 million won out of the defrauded amount to the victimized company; that the Defendant did not have the record of the same criminal act; that in the case of Defendant B, it appears to be against the Defendant’s criminal act in order to assist the Defendant A who was friendly; that there was no profit derived from the instant criminal act; that there was no criminal record of the same kind of crime or of the punishment exceeding the fine; and that there was no criminal record of the same crime or the punishment beyond the fine, etc., the Defendant’
However, the Defendants’ crime of this case was intended to appropriate the funds for purchasing real estate by using the hub of the fund lending system for the ordinary people. In light of the method of crime and means, the nature of the crime is not good in light of the crime, the amount of fraud is equivalent to approximately KRW 60 million, and there is no further circumstance that the damage was recovered or agreed upon in the past. Defendant A was the actual beneficiary of the crime of this case, and there is the most significant degree of involvement in the crime of this case. The lower court determined the punishment corresponding to the lowest sentence of the recommended punishment in the sentencing guidelines. Defendant B participated in the crime of this case as a real estate broker in the position to ensure the professional reliability as a real estate broker, and is not responsible for it. In full view of all the various circumstances, including the Defendants’ age, sex, environment, family relationship, motive and circumstance after the crime, etc., the punishment imposed by the lower court against the Defendants is too unreasonable.