사기미수등
All the judgment below is reversed.
Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and four months.
When gallonging seized Samsung jums, S7 1.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing: Imprisonment with prison labor for 8 months and confiscation; imprisonment with prison labor for 6 months and imprisonment for 3 months) of the lower court’s sentence against the Defendant is too unreasonable.
2. We examine ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for ex officio appeal.
The defendant appealed against the judgment of the court below in 1 to 3, and this court decided to hold a joint hearing of all appeals cases.
However, each of the above judgments of the court below against the defendant is a concurrent crime under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and a single sentence is determined in accordance with Article 38 (1) of the Criminal Act. Thus, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained as it is.
3. If so, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's unfair argument of sentencing, and the judgment below is reversed in entirety and it is again decided as follows.
【Grounds for a new judgment】 The facts constituting an offense and summary of evidence recognized by the court are identical to the facts constituting an offense and summary of evidence, and the gist of evidence are identical to the facts in each corresponding column of the judgment below, thereby citing them as they are under Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure
Application of Statutes
1. Relevant legal provisions of the Criminal Act and Articles 347(1), 30 (Crime of Fraud), 352, 347(1), and 30 (Crime of Attempted Fraud) of the Criminal Act, and each choice of imprisonment with prison labor, respectively;
1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;
1. The reasons for sentencing under Article 48(1)1 of the Confiscation Criminal Code recognize all of the crimes in this case. The defendant agreed with the victim of the second and third original judgment and the victim of the fraud in the judgment of the court below, and the health of the defendant was good. However, the defendant served as the "measures for withdrawal or delivery" of the crimes in Bosing in return for a certain amount of consideration, and the degree of the defendant's participation is not weak, and is organized and differentiated.