자본시장과금융투자업에관한법률위반등
1. Each part of the judgment of the court below against the Defendants is reversed.
Defendant
A. In 10 months of imprisonment, Defendant B.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The judgment of the court below that acquitted Defendant A of the violation of the Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act, violation of the Act on the Regulation of Conducting Fund-Raising Business without Permission, and fraud from November 19, 2014 to April 24, 2015, is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles, which affected the conclusion of sentencing.
B. Although Defendant A (1) misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles, Defendant A did not have participated in the crime before October 22, 2015 in the annexed crime list (3) as indicated in the judgment of the court below, the court below found Defendant A guilty of this part of the charges and erred by misapprehending the legal principles.
(2) The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (ten months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
C. Each sentence of the lower court against Defendants B, C, D, E, C, D, and E (Defendant B: Imprisonment of one year and two months, Defendant C: Imprisonment of ten months, Defendant D: Imprisonment of eight months, Defendant D: Imprisonment of eight months, and Defendant E: Imprisonment of ten months) is too unreasonable.
Defendant
The judgment of the court below which convicted the Defendant of the facts charged that “AG received KRW 20 million” without receiving the money from the misunderstanding of facts, is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts.
(2) The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (ten months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
2. The lower court found the Defendant guilty on the facts charged of this case on the grounds that some parts of the table of crime (2) Nos. 4, 7, and 13 attached to the lower judgment (hereinafter “the table of crime”) were not guilty on the grounds of violation of the Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act, violation of the Act on the Regulation of Conducting Fund-Raising Business without Permission, and fraud, and found the Defendant guilty on the part of the list of crimes (3) Nos. 4, 7, and 13.
On the other hand, the Defendants filed each appeal against the guilty portion, and the Defendants and the Prosecutor did not appeal against the acquittal portion of the reasons.
If so, both the Defendants and the public prosecutor appeal.