사기등
All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The lower court’s punishment (one year and six months of imprisonment, confiscation) is too unreasonable.
B. The Prosecutor’s sentence is too uneased and unreasonable.
2. The determination of sentencing is based on the statutory penalty, with a discretionary determination that takes place within a reasonable and appropriate scope, taking into account the factors constituting the conditions for sentencing prescribed in Article 51 of the Criminal Act, based on which our Criminal Procedure Act, which takes the trial-oriented principle and the principle of directness, has a unique area of the first instance trial regarding the
In addition, considering these circumstances and the ex post facto nature of the appellate court, it is reasonable to respect the sentencing conditions in the event that there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, and to refrain from rendering a sentence that does not differ from the first instance court on the sole ground that the sentence of the first instance falls within the reasonable scope of discretion, even though the sentence of the first instance court is somewhat different from the opinion of the appellate court.
(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). The lower court, based on its stated reasoning, sentenced the Defendant to the said punishment.
The circumstances cited by the defendant and the prosecutor as the grounds for appeal are elements that have already been determined by the court below as well as sufficiently taken into account when determining the punishment, and there is no special change in the conditions for sentencing, except that the defendant has led to the confession of all crimes in the trial.
Specifically, the fact that the defendant acknowledges his mistake and reflects all of his mistake, that the defendant is the primary offender who has no criminal record, and some of the crimes are attempted, can be considered as favorable circumstances to the defendant.
On the other hand, the criminal defendant's participation in the singishing fraud is an organized crime and only an act is shared.