Judgment

The defendant acquired approximately KRW 1,00,000 from five victims in total as investment money, and acquired it, and stolen 19 mobile phones or embezzled 19 mobile phones. It is very poor to commit the crime.

The defendant was unable to receive a letter from the victims.

This is disadvantageous to the defendant.

The Defendant appears to have led to the confession of the crime of this case and to reflect the mistake.

The Defendant paid approximately KRW 790,000 to the victims in the form of profits, as seen in Section 7, Section 3 of the lower judgment.

The cellular phone that the defendant stolen or embezzled lost possession was confiscated and returned to the victims.

There is no criminal offense beyond the fine against the defendant.

This is the circumstances favorable to the defendant.

In light of the overall circumstances favorable to the Defendant, the lower court’s sentence sentenced to three years of imprisonment cannot be deemed to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion, and thus, cannot be deemed to be unreasonable.

Nevertheless, the prosecutor argues that the sentencing of the court below is unfair, and this is examined.

The prosecutor asserts that the defendant's return of part of the money obtained through deception as a profit is only a way to maintain the deception, and it should not be considered as a favorable normal situation.

Although it seems that the victims would have more easily believed that they have the intent to repay or ability to repay to the defendant, it is clear that the victims have reduced the amount of damage due to the return of the proceeds, as seen above, it cannot be said that it would be unfair to consider it as favorable circumstances in full view of the fact that the amount returned under the pretext of the proceeds reaches approximately KRW 790 million.