권리행사방해등
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.
However, this judgment is delivered against the defendant.
1. In light of the following: (a) the gist of the grounds for appeal is against the Defendant’s depth; (b) the instant fraud crime was not planned; (c) the lower court agreed with the assignee of the claim of the victim of fraud; and (d) expressed that all victims do not want punishment; and (c) the Defendant did not have any criminal record exceeding the fine, the sentence (6 months of imprisonment) imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable.
2. Each of the instant crimes committed by the Defendant, without the consent of the mortgagee, provides a mortgaged car as security, and deceiving the victim as if he/she purchases a car and uses it normally, and the total amount of the damage amount reaches KRW 100 million.
Meanwhile, at the lower court, the Defendant agreed with the Defendant’s acquisition of the Defendant’s claim against the Defendant by the victim of fraud, and agreed to the victim’s character loan Co., Ltd., Ltd., the victim’s right interference with the exercise of rights, with repayment of KRW 25 million, and agreed to do so.
Defendant reflects his depth on each of the crimes of this case, and did not have any criminal record exceeding a fine.
In addition, in full view of all the sentencing conditions in the records and arguments of this case including the age, sex, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, including favorable or unfavorable circumstances to the defendant, the sentence of the court below against the defendant is judged to be unfair due to the absence of the sentence of the defendant.
3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act as the defendant's appeal is with merit, and the judgment below is ruled as follows.
【Re-written 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 thus, Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act is the same as the relevant facts of the judgment of the court below.