사기등
The judgment below
Of them, the part against Defendant A shall be reversed.
Defendant
A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for ten months.
Defendant
C.
1. From October 31, 2018 to December 3, 2018, the lower court took part in the act of receiving KRW 69,505,80 on 33 occasions, as stated in attached Table 2 of the lower judgment’s judgment, from October 31, 2018 to December 3, 2018.
'' judged not guilty on the grounds of this part, and found guilty on the remaining facts charged in relation to the crime as a whole with the acquittal of the above reasons.
As to this, only Defendant C appealed against the judgment of the court below, and the prosecutor did not appeal against the acquittal of the reasoning.
In such a case, according to the indivisible principle of appeal, the acquittal part of the reason is also judged to be judged in the trial together with the guilty part. However, the acquittal part of the reason is deemed to have already been relieved from the object of attack and defense between the parties.
(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Do12934, Jan. 14, 2010). Therefore, with respect to the part not guilty for the above reason, the conclusion of the lower judgment is to be followed, and no separate determination is to be made.
2. The sentence of the lower court (one year of imprisonment with prison labor for the Defendants A, and four million won for the Defendants C) against the Defendants in the summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable.
3. Determination
A. The act of receiving judgment on the assertion of unfair sentencing by Defendant A requires strict measures as the harm to society as a whole is very great.
In particular, Defendant A was responsible for raising investment money even though he was aware of the fact that Defendant A played a leading role in the instant crime and could not pay the proceeds promised to the victims.
Defendant
A The amount obtained by deceit is up to KRW 145 million, and even if considering that a considerable portion of the amount has been recovered to the victims in the form of payment of earnings, a substantial amount out of the amount obtained by deceit has not yet been recovered.
Defendant
A. A.