사기
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the reasons for appeal (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
2. Under our criminal litigation law, which takes the trial-oriented principle and the direct principle, there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect the determination of sentencing (Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). The fact that the defendant shows an attitude to recognize and reflect the instant crime. The amount acquired by the defendant is not relatively large, and the fact that the defendant satisfied the damage to the victim G and J, and the victims do not want the punishment of the defendant by agreement with the victims is favorable to the defendant.
However, the Defendant had been punished several times for a crime similar to the instant case, and even on August 26, 2014, upon being sentenced to one year of imprisonment for a crime of fraud, committed the instant crime of the same kind during the period of repeated crime after the execution of the sentence was completed on June 26, 2015.
In addition, the Defendant was arrested as a flagrant offender on October 19, 2015, the first of each of the instant crimes, on October 19, 2015, and was released, and again committed the second fraud on the same day after being released. Accordingly, the Defendant again arrested a flagrant offender, was released, and again committed the third fraud. In light of this, the Defendant seems to repeating the fraud without any particular consideration.
These points are disadvantageous to the defendant.
In full view of each of the above circumstances, comprehensively taking account of the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, motive and background of the instant crime, means and method, and all the sentencing factors expressed in the instant records and trial process, such as the circumstances after the commission of the crime, the sentence imposed by the lower court is deemed to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion, or to be unfair due to it.