사기등
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than three years and four months.
1. The sentence imposed by the court below on the summary of the reasons for appeal (4 years and six months) is too unreasonable.
2. The Defendant’s act of fraud at the time of the instant commission of fraud would give victims the removal of the F building reconstruction project in Bupyeong-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, which was promoted by the Defendant Company D, which was actually operated by the Defendant.
The deceiving and deceiving the victims by receiving money from the victims for the purpose of borrowing money, etc., the nature of the crime is heavy, the means and methods of the crime are defective, the victims of the crime are all five persons due to the fraud, the amount of damage exceeds the total of 500 million won, and the amount of damage is considerably large. Nevertheless, the victim did not agree with the victims except P up to the judgment of the court, and the payment of damage is not properly made, and the defendant has the record of being punished several times of frauds. In particular, on September 18, 2009, the Seoul Central District Court sentenced the defendant to three years of imprisonment with prison labor for frauds at the Seoul Central District Court on April 27, 201, and did not know that the execution of the punishment is a repeated crime, and even if the execution of the punishment was completed, the defendant committed the crime of this case under the same several Acts and subordinate statutes, it is disadvantageous to the defendant.
However, in light of the above facts, the court below's punishment against the defendant is too excessive and unfair in light of the following circumstances: (a) the defendant confessions all of the crimes of this case, (b) the defendant is in violation of depth, (c) the rebuilding project of the F building seems to result in each of the crimes of this case, (d) the victim P and the victim P have not been punished against the defendant, and (e) the defendant's age, sex, conduct, environment, family relationship, and (e) the circumstances and results of each of the crimes of this case, and (e) all of the sentencing conditions of this case, such as the circumstances after the crime.
3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reasonable in accordance with Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, as the defendant's appeal is reasonable.