사기
All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.
On the summary of the reasons for appeal, the defendant asserts that the defendant is too unfasible to the punishment of the court below (one year and six months of imprisonment), and that the prosecutor is too unfased and unfair.
2. According to Articles 343, 358, and 359 of the Criminal Procedure Act, where a defendant is dissatisfied with the judgment of the court below, a petition of appeal shall be submitted in writing within seven days from the date the judgment of the court is pronounced.
According to the records, the defendant's appeal was made after the right to appeal was extinguished and the reasons for ex officio investigation cannot be found even after examining the judgment below. The defendant's appeal was made after seven days from November 5, 2020, which was the date of the judgment of the court below, and the reason for ex officio investigation was not examined.
Therefore, the defendant's appeal shall be dismissed by a ruling pursuant to Articles 362 (1) and 360 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act. However, the defendant's appeal shall be dismissed by a judgment as stated below in the Disposition above, as long as a judgment is rendered on the prosecutor's appeal as follows.
3. The Criminal Litigation Act, which takes the trial-oriented principle and direct principle as to the prosecutor’s appeal, has the unique area of the first instance judgment as to the determination of sentencing, and there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance judgment, and the first instance judgment does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). Even if the materials submitted in the trial at the first instance court were submitted, there is no meaningful change in the terms of sentencing compared to the lower judgment, and comprehensively taking account of all the various circumstances, which form the conditions of sentencing as to the instant records and the theory of changes, the lower court’s sentencing was too uneased and exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion, thereby exceeding the reasonable scope of discretion.
shall not be deemed to exist.
Therefore, the prosecutor's improper argument of sentencing is without merit.
4. Thus, the appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit.