특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(절도)등
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. The decision of the court below on the summary of the grounds for appeal (a prison term of three years and six months and confiscation) is too unreasonable.
2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the judgment of the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it.
(see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The Defendant recognized a mistake from an investigative agency, and the benefits acquired from each of the instant crimes are relatively large. Of the total amount obtained by deception of each of the instant fraud crimes, approximately KRW 30,40,000 out of the total amount of fraud of each of the instant fraud crimes was registered as an accident account, and thus, it is favorable to the Defendant.
However, even though the Defendant had been sentenced to eight times of punishment due to property-related crimes, such as theft and fraud, the Defendant was sentenced to two years of imprisonment due to a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, such as the first head of the judgment of the court below, and began to commit each of the crimes of this case again at least three months after the execution of the sentence was completed and released.
In addition, each of the instant fraud crimes is deemed to play a role as a liability for withdrawal by the Defendant who participated in the crime of Bosing and taking part in it. It is reasonable to the number of the Defendant’s participation and the amount of fraud, and it seems that the Defendant did not recover from the damage, except the money returned to the victim AS in the criminal trial against the accomplice K among the damages actually incurred. The crime of Bosing is a secret and organized crime, which is difficult to regulate because it is difficult to control it because the scope of damage is limited and it is not easy to recover damage, and social harm is very great. In this regard, it is necessary to severely punish the Defendant.
Although the defendant submitted data agreed with the victim C of the larceny when he was in the first instance, each of the crimes of this case by the defendant.