특정경제범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(사기)등
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
The court below's adjudication scope of this Court dismissed all the application for compensation filed by B, C, and D, and the applicant cannot file an objection against the judgment dismissing the application for compensation (Article 32 (4) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings). The part of the court below's rejection of application for compensation among the judgment below's decision is excluded from the scope of adjudication of this court
The punishment sentenced by the court below (five years of imprisonment) shall be too unreasonable.
Judgment
If there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the original judgment in the appellate court, and the sentencing of the original court is not beyond the scope of reasonable discretion, it is reasonable to respect
(see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). As to the instant case, there is no significant change in the sentencing conditions compared to the lower court in the appellate trial.
The fact that the defendant voluntarily surrenders to investigative agencies and voluntarily tried to criminal punishment, and that there is a family member to support, such as recognizing all criminal facts, etc., and that there are family members to support should be considered as favorable circumstances to the defendant.
However, the Defendant, a licensed real estate agent, obtained money of KRW 360,000 from the victim H as a loan, and acquired it as a collateral in connection with this, he/she forged or uses multiple private documents, such as a mortgage contract, a registration information, and a registration completion notice, and official documents in the name of the victim H.
In addition, even though the person was requested to conclude a monthly rent contract, the person who was the broker has the authority to conclude the monthly rent contract and acquired the deposit from the broker, and the victim remains 7 persons and the amount of damage exceeds 90 million won.
In addition, the victim P acquired KRW 142 million from the victim P to the cost of trading officetels and embezzled KRW 125 million from the lease deposit to be returned to the victim B.
The crime is mostly a licensed real estate agent.