beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
The judgment below
Among the compensation applicants G, H, I,O, Q, each part of compensation order.
Reasons
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) by the lower court (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. Article 32(1)3 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Ex officio Proceedings for Determination as to the part of an order for compensation ought to be dismissed by ruling where it is deemed unreasonable to issue an order for compensation.
Article 25 (3) 3 of the same Act provides that "where the existence or scope of the defendant's liability for compensation is not clear, the order for compensation shall not be issued.
"........"
According to the records, the fact that the defendant remitted money to the applicant for compensation as stated in the order from December 12, 2016 to December 23, 2016 or exceeding the amount of money.
According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant's liability for compensation against the above applicants is not clear whether or not it exists or not, so this part of the compensation order by the court below is an incidental law.
B. The circumstances favorable to the Defendant are the following: (a) the Defendant’s mistake in the determination of an unfair assertion of sentencing is against the recognition of the error by the Defendant; (b) the Defendant has been sentenced to a fine before and after the lapse of one time; and (c) the Defendant paid an additional amount of KRW 456,00
However, even if the amount of individual damage was caused by the lower court’s sentencing and the Internet goods fraud against an unspecified number of unspecified victims, it is necessary to strictly punish it in order to prevent the mass production of a similar crime that is likely to disrupt the order of electronic commerce and increase social expenses even if the amount of damage was small, and to prevent the mass production of a similar crime. The Defendant continued to commit the crime of the 2016 ancient group 3429 even after the Defendant was indicted for committing the crime of the 1974 high group 2016 high group 2016 high group 3429. The Defendant paid a total amount of KRW 1.7 million up to the first instance court, and all of the records and arguments of the instant case.