폭력행위등처벌에관한법률위반(집단ㆍ흉기등공갈)등
The judgment below
Of them, the part against Defendant A shall be reversed.
Defendant
A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for one year.
Defendant
C.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendant C (unfair punishment) The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant (one year and six months of imprisonment, and confiscation) is too unreasonable.
B. Defendant A (unfair punishment)’s imprisonment (one year of imprisonment) sentenced by the lower court against the Defendant is too unreasonable.
2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds of appeal on unreasonable sentencing by Defendant A, prior to the judgment on the grounds of appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing by Defendant A, whether the judgment of the court below on Defendant A is within the scope of the applicable sentencing by law.
From among the crimes of this case, each of the crimes of this case constitutes imprisonment for a limited term of not less than three years and not less than one year and six months if the statutory penalty is imposed for a prison term of not less than three years, and the crime of violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (joint conflict) with the crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act (unlicensed Operation) and the crime of substantial concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and if the punishment is aggravated within the limit of the proviso of Article 42 of the Criminal Act, the scope of the punishment of the court below against Defendant A shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months and not more than 50 years
However, without applying discretionary mitigation in the application of statutes, the lower court erred by sentencing one year imprisonment with prison labor for the Defendant and leaving the scope of punishment by law, and in this respect, the lower judgment was no longer maintained.
3. We examine the judgment on the assertion of unfair sentencing by Defendant C; the defendant led to the confession of each of the crimes of this case and reflects his mistake; the victims do not want to be punished against the defendant; the defendant did not have any criminal record of the same kind or suspended execution; the defendant was the young age of 24 years old; the defendant was at the age of 24 years old; and the defendant's family members want to have an opportunity to know about the punishment through confinement life exceeding 5 months; and the defendant's family members want to have a preference against the defendant.