전기통신사업법위반등
The judgment below
The part against the defendant shall be reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.
Seized evidence 5.
The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment with prison labor for not less than one year and six months, suspension of execution, confiscation, and collection), which are sentenced by the court below, is too uneased and unfair.
2. The Defendant: (a) committed a crime in violation of the Telecommunications Business Act by installing and managing VolP Gawawawawa, (b) conspired with a name influor, and acquired KRW 7 million from the victim; (c) in collusion with B, the Defendant administered phiphones once in collusion with B.
The crime of violating the Telecommunications Business Act is a crime that forms the basis of other serious crimes, such as Bophishing fraud, and the “VolP Llostweg”, which actually was installed and managed by the Defendant, was used in the crime of fraud, and the victim occurred. Therefore, the Defendant’s liability is heavy.
In light of the period, method, and content of the message that the defendant gives and receives with his/her name in violation of the Telecommunications Business Act, the defendant seems to have continued to commit a crime even though he/she is relatively clearly aware of the illegality of his/her work.
It is necessary to strictly punish the crime of galphon medication as well as the personal and social harm caused thereby.
Comprehensively taking into account the above circumstances and the Defendant’s age, character and conduct and environment, the motive, means and consequence of the instant crime, and all the sentencing conditions indicated in the pleadings of the instant case, such as the circumstances after the commission of the crime, even if considering the favorable circumstances such as the recognition of the instant crime, the fact that there was no record of punishment in the Republic of Korea, and the fact that the instant crime was committed once, the sentence imposed by the lower court is too uneasible and unreasonable.
Therefore, the prosecutor's argument of unfair sentencing is justified.
3. If so, the prosecutor's appeal is reasonable, and the part of the judgment below against the defendant is reversed and it is decided again as follows after pleading pursuant to Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act.
[Judgment of multiple court] Criminal facts and summary of evidence recognized by the court.