beta
(영문) 광주고등법원(제주) 2020.09.09 2020노54

특수공갈미수

Text

Defendant

All appeals filed by C, H and I and prosecutor are dismissed.

Reasons

1. The court below found Defendant I not guilty of Defendant I’s crime of attempted special attack, and the prosecutor filed an appeal on the ground of unfair sentencing only for the guilty portion.

Therefore, since the part of the judgment of the court below which acquitted Defendant I as above was separated and confirmed as it is, the scope of the judgment of this court against Defendant I is limited to the guilty part of the judgment of the court below (Therefore, the part that "a person who attempted special attack" which does not fall within the scope of the judgment of this court is excluded from the name of the crime against Defendant I).

A. Defendant C, H, and I’s sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendants (Defendant C: 10 months of imprisonment and 2 years of suspended sentence, Defendant H, and I’s imprisonment and 1 years of suspended sentence) are too unreasonable.

B. The sentence imposed by the public prosecutor by the lower court on the Defendants (i) one year, one year of imprisonment, two years of probation, one year of imprisonment, two years of probation, two years of imprisonment with prison labor for the crime under paragraph (1) of the same Article as indicated in the lower judgment, one year of imprisonment with prison labor for the crime under paragraph (1) of the same Article, and two years of probation, and one year for the crime under Articles 4 through 8, 14 and 15 of the Criminal Act as indicated in the lower judgment, and three years of imprisonment with prison labor for the defendant C: 10 months, and two years of probation, four years of probation,

3. Determination

A. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the lower court in the appellate court’s relevant legal doctrine, and the lower court’s sentencing is not beyond the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable

(see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). (B)

Defendant

A, C, and F Defendants: (a) induced the victim L with sexual traffic; (b) have attempted to withdraw the property.

In light of the circumstances and contents of the crime, the nature of the crime is not good, and there is no suspicion of the victim.

However, the defendants recognized the crime, and this part of the crime was attempted.

Defendant

A and F have no record of criminal punishment.