Violation of the Voluntary Protection Act and Resident Registration Act

64 64, 69, 125, 147, 159, 173, 179, 196, 248, 334, 364, and 372 damages.

Application for Order

(a) Fact-finding (Inspection)

In light of the records of this case, although the defendant could be found to have committed a loan fraud in collusion with a name-free person, the court below found the defendant not guilty of the fraud among the facts charged of this case on the ground that it is difficult to view that the defendant committed a loan fraud by a name-free person. Therefore, the court below erred in the misunderstanding of facts.

B. Unreasonable sentencing (Inter-party)

As to the sentence of the court below (one year and six months of imprisonment, and confiscation), the defendant asserts that the defendant is too large, and that the prosecutor is unfurned and unfair.

2. Determination

A. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of fact

The court below rendered a not guilty verdict on the facts charged that the defendant in collusion with the person who caused the damage for the loan without the intention or ability to make a loan and received money as a security deposit, etc. on the grounds as stated in its reasoning. On the contrary to the reasoning and records of the judgment of the court below, the judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and the judgment of the court below does not seem to have an error of law that affected the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding the truth as alleged by the prosecutor, and therefore the prosecutor'

B. Determination of unfair sentencing on the assertion of unfair sentencing

Of the crime of this case, the defendant illegally acquired the personal information of the mobile phone and the mobile phone name holder who wants to raise funds by making use of the personal information of the people who want to raise funds due to an imminent situation from his name-free person in the situation where his economic situation is difficult, after making the account on the Internet game and the mobile phone operator's Internet website, using the mobile phone small-amount settlement, charging cyber money, and selling it, and making the amount of the settlement to be charged to the cell phone name holder who is highly poor as above. The crime of having the defendant bear the amount of the settlement to five employees, and the illegal mobile phone and personal information collected by the defendant, and various Internet sites.

In light of the fact that the defendant led and led each of the crimes of this case, such as membership, small-sum settlement, and posting of printed messages, etc., he was taking charge of and led to the commission of each of the crimes of this case, and the method of committing the crime was secret and organized, such as using the passbook, etc. The defendant repeatedly committed the crime against many unspecified victims, and the total sum of the amount of damage incurred in the crime of this case is KRW 295, 988,000, and around KRW 10 million per month for employees’ benefits, and the period of the crime is not shorter, it is inevitable to sentence the defendant as a sentence.

However, all of the crimes of this case are recognized by the defendant, and the defendant has no criminal records of the same kind or suspended execution or more, and most of the victims of the crime of this case have agreed to exclude persons whose identity has not been confirmed from among the victims of the crime of this case, or have made efforts to recover damage by depositing the amount of damage and making efforts to do so, and sentencing is imposed, such as the defendant's age, character and conduct, living environment, motive, means

Comprehensively taking into account all the circumstances that form a condition, the lower court was sentenced to a lower sentence than that set forth in the sentencing guidelines, which is not deemed to be too heavy or unreasonable.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, since the appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit, they are all dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.

Judge Ro Round

Judges Mahova-Gyeong

Determination of types on the basis of the aggregate of amounts acquired)

【Special Convicted Persons】

- Special persons: in the event that they have led to or directed the commission of fraud, they shall be subject to unspecified or large number of victims;

(b) Where the crime has been committed repeatedly over a considerable period of time;

- A special mitigation: A case where punishment is not granted or a significant damage is recovered;

[The scope of the recommendations and the scope of recommendations] Aggravation, 2 years and 8 years to 7 years (the most serious crime as a result of adding together identical concurrent crimes)

The lower limit shall be reduced to 2/3 by falling under the case of a higher level.