beta
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2019.09.19 2019노1710

사기등

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment and six years) by the lower court (e.g., imprisonment and six years) is too unreasonable.

2. The Defendant recognized all of the instant crimes, and shown his attitude to repent of his mistake.

The defendant cannot be seen as using the full amount of the defrauded money of this case.

It seems that the health status of the defendant is not good.

The spouse and the branch of the defendant appeal against the defendant.

However, the defendant, as the victim B, acquired KRW 30 million from the victim W, and acquired KRW 13 million from the victim E, respectively, and prepared one copy of the standard subcontract agreement of construction work, which is a private document, with the qualification of the representative director of H Co., Ltd., and the criminal liability is heavy.

It seems that the damage caused by each fraud of this case was not completely recovered.

The Defendant committed each of the crimes of this case during the period of repeated crime due to criminal records identical to each of the crimes of this case.

The Defendant was sentenced to a judgment of the lower court while in the process of the trial by the lower court, and subsequently, became subject to the appeal of this case through the recovery of his right to appeal.

All the defendants have a record of criminal punishment for nine times (one time of actual punishment, and eight times of fines). Of them, one time of criminal punishment is the same as that of each fraud of this case.

In addition, even if the defendant's age, career, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, social relation, motive and circumstance of the crime, method and consequence of the crime, etc. are added to all the sentencing factors indicated in the records and arguments, there is no new circumstance to deem that the sentencing conditions of the court below against the defendant have been changed in the first instance court, and it is not determined that the sentencing of the court below is unfair because it goes beyond reasonable discretion.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

3. The appeal by the defendant is justified.