사기등
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed;
2. The order for compensation against the applicant E for compensation by the court below is as follows:
1. The sentence imposed by the lower court (two years of imprisonment) on the summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court with respect to the part of the Defendant case, and where the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect such a case (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). Based on the foregoing legal doctrine, there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the lower court’s judgment because new sentencing materials have not been submitted in the trial and the court did not change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the lower court’s judgment. In full view of the reasons for sentencing revealed during the pleadings of the instant case, the lower court’s sentencing was too excessive and exceeded
It does not appear.
Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.
B. Where an appeal against a conviction is filed against the part of the compensation order against the applicant E, the confirmation of the compensation order is interrupted, and the order is transferred to the appellate court (Article 33(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings) along with the Defendant case, and even where the original judgment is maintained in the appellate court (Article 33(4) of the same Act). The lower court issued the compensation order to pay the Defendant amounting to KRW 300,000 by deceiving the Defendant E to the applicant E, but according to the records, it is reasonable to revise the compensation order against the applicant E within the scope of the above amount recognized.
3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices, on the ground that Article 25 (1), 31 (1), 31 (2), 31 (3), and 33 (4) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings is revised to order compensation for the applicant E.