beta
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.10.13 2016노803

사기

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

No. 1 of the judgment of the defendant

(a).

The crimes provided for in Article 2 of the Judgment shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for one year and six months.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., the form of punishment) by the lower court;

(a).

A crime: Imprisonment with prison labor for a year and June, 3 years of probation, 2 years of imprisonment with prison labor, 3 years of probation, and 3 years of probation) are too unfluent and unfair.

(a).

According to the records on the crime of this case, the defendant is sentenced to 6 months of imprisonment with prison labor and 2 years of suspended execution on May 15, 2015 by obstructing the exercise of rights by the District Court, which was sentenced on May 15, 2015, and the above judgment became final and conclusive on December 30, 2015. As such, the crime for which the judgment became final and the crime of this case was committed before

(a).

As the crime of concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, punishment shall be imposed on the relevant crime in consideration of equity and the concurrent judgment in accordance with Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 1 of the judgment of the court below.

(a).

The part on the crime is no longer maintained.

3. In full view of the following circumstances: (a) the public prosecutor’s judgment on the assertion of unfair sentencing (as to the second crime in the market) at the same time with the final and conclusive punishment, equity is considered in the case of rendering a judgment; (b) the method and contents of deception against the victim are not good; (c) the amount of deception by the victim reaches KRW 300 million and not recovered until now; and (d) the victim expressed his intent not to be punished by the defendant at the court below, but at the present on the ground that he did not have fulfilled his obligation in accordance with the content of the agreement, the court below’s punishment for the second crime in the judgment of the defendant is too unreasonable.

This part of the prosecutor's argument is with merit.

4. Conclusion No. 1-2 of the judgment below

(a).

The part of the crime is subject to ex officio reversal, and the prosecutor's appeal on the part of the second crime is reasonable.

(a).

In accordance with Article 364(2) and (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, without examining the prosecutor's argument of unfair sentencing on the part of the crime.