사기
The judgment below
Of the defendants B, the part of the defendant is reversed.
Defendant
B A person shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than four months.
Defendant
A’s appeal.
1. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that the sentence of the lower court (the imprisonment of eight months for Defendant A and the imprisonment of six months for Defendant B) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. It is advantageous to Defendant A’s recognition of and against the instant crime, the primary fact that Defendant A was a principal offender, and the partial repayment of the loan interest.
However, the crime of this case was committed by taking over loans by abusing the loan system of the fund borrowed on a systematic and planned basis, and there is a very great harm to the society, and thus there is a need to strictly punish the crime, and the degree of participation in the crime is not somewhat weak, such as taking part in the crime by Defendant A in the role of a false lessee.
It seems that the fraud amount is considerable to KRW 56 million, the profit gained by the crime of this case is about KRW 13 million, and it seems that there is no particular effort to recover the damage.
In full view of the above circumstances and other circumstances, Defendant A’s age, sexual conduct, environment, motive for crime, means and consequence, there is no special change in circumstances that may otherwise determine the sentence and the sentencing conditions indicated in the records of this case, such as the circumstances after the crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment against Defendant A is too unreasonable.
Therefore, Defendant A’s assertion is without merit.
B. The instant crime against Defendant B was committed by acquiring a loan by abusing the loan system of the entire loan system in a systematic and planned manner, and there is a very high social harm, and thus, there is a need to strictly punish Defendant B. Defendant B does not seem to be less complicated than the degree of participation in the instant crime, such as taking part in the crime by taking charge of a false lessor’s role.
It seems that the amount of fraud, which is 56 million won or more, is disadvantageous.
However, there is no record that Defendant B recognized the instant crime, and there is no record of punishment for the same crime, and the benefits that Defendant B acquired from the instant crime.