사기등
All the defendant cases among the judgment below shall be reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and eight months.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (in the case of the first instance judgment: imprisonment with prison labor for a year and February, and the second instance judgment: imprisonment with prison labor for a period of eight months) of each lower judgment is too unreasonable.
2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal, each of the above appeals cases was joined in the first and second trials ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal, and each of the offenses in the first and second judgment against the Defendant is concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and thus, one sentence should be imposed pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. As such, the first and second judgment cannot be maintained.
3. Accordingly, the court below's decision is reversed in entirety among the judgment below under Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing, and it is again decided as follows through pleading.
[Discied Judgment] The summary of facts constituting an offense and evidence recognized by the court is the same as that of each corresponding column of the original judgment, and thus, it shall be quoted in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.
Application of Statutes
1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act and Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act (Fraud, Selection of Imprisonment), Article 347-2 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 352 and 347-2 of the Criminal Act concerning the concurrent crimes committed by the use of computers, etc.) and Articles 37 (latter part) and 39(1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of criminal facts;
1. From among concurrent crimes, the Defendant for the reason of sentencing under the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act recognizes all of the crimes of this case and is against the law.
In the first instance, the Defendant paid or agreed on the amount of damage to five victims of the second instance judgment.
Each of the crimes of this case is the concurrent crimes between the crime of fraud for which judgment has become final and the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and there is a need to determine punishment in consideration of equity with the case of judgment.
On the other hand, the defendant has been punished several times for the same crime.