국외이송유인
All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.
1. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the charges by taking full account of the relevant legal principles and the detailed circumstances as stated in its reasoning, on the ground that the Defendant was able to easily obtain money from the victims without any physical contact in the United States, making them go to the United States, and making it difficult for the victims who have no means of self-reliance in the United States due to lack of language ability to actually depend on the Defendant or singing-sing-sing-sing-sing-sing-sing-sing-sing-out business operator
The judgment of the court below is justified in light of the following circumstances which the court below duly adopted and compared with the evidence examined.
There is no error of misconception of facts as alleged by the defendant.
This part of the Defendant’s assertion is rejected.
2. Compared to the judgment of the court below on the assertion of unfair sentencing by both parties, there is no change in the sentencing conditions, and where the court below’s sentencing does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable
(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). In this case, no new sentencing data was submitted by this court and no particular change exists in the sentencing conditions compared to the original judgment.
In addition, in full view of the sentencing conditions as shown in the records and arguments of this case, it cannot be said that the lower court’s punishment is excessively heavy, or that it exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion by being frighted.
The Defendant and the prosecutor’s assertion that the lower court’s punishment is unreasonable are all rejected.
3. The appeal filed by the Defendant and the prosecutor in conclusion is dismissed on the grounds of merit.