사기등
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than two years and eight months.
gallon City J5(No. 9).
1. Documents submitted by the defense counsel of the defendant after the deadline for submitting the statement of grounds for appeal shall be considered to the extent of supplement in case of appeal;
A. misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles 1) The Defendant withdrawn only KRW 5,980,000 out of the amount of damage 2,1250,000,000 won from the victim E, and received only KRW 30,55 million out of the amount of damage 4,55,000,000, the Defendant does not bear joint principal liability for the total amount of damage of the said victims in excess of the above amount. 2) The Defendant did not have awareness that he was involved in the crime of Bophishing, and without awareness that he was a forged document, the Defendant printed out the document under the name of the Chairman of the Financial Services Commission according to the direction of the employee of the Financial Services Commission, and thus cannot be deemed joint principal liability for
B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (three years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. Determination of misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles is established by satisfying the subjective objective requirements, which are the implementation of a crime through functional control based on the intention of co-processing and the functional intent of co-processing. Even if there was no process of the whole conspiracy among co-offenders, if there was a combination of intent to jointly process a certain crime in a successive or secret manner and realize the crime, a competitive relationship is established. Even if a person who did not directly participate in the act of the commission has been involved in the act of the commission, even if he/she did not participate in the act of the commission, he/she is held liable as a co-principal for the act of another co-principal, and if the defendant denies the criminal intent together with the fact of the conspiracy, the facts constituting such subjective element have to be proved by the method of proving indirect facts or circumstantial facts that have a substantial relation with the criminal intent (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Do1872, Nov. 25, 2010).