beta
Text
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendant
A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for ten months.
However, for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.
Reasons
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (the defendant and the prosecutor) is unreasonable. The punishment imposed by the court below (the imprisonment of 10 months and the surcharge of 24 million won).
2. The crime of this case is committed on a regular basis at least seven occasions under the pretext of solicitation or good offices by the Defendant to the I operating a speculative game room, such as providing information on the regulation of the game room, and in particular, it is necessary to punish the Defendant strictly considering that the Defendant’s act is serious in the nature of the crime in light of the method, period, and frequency of the crime, and the following facts: (a) the Defendant informed the I of the speculative game room operated by the I to the police, and (b) he informed the I that it would immediately be controlled before the police; and (c) the police who was informed of the fact that it was provided as if he received the control information from the present police officer; and (d) the Defendant’s act seriously undermines the fairness of the performance of official duties and the influence thereof, and thus, is highly harmful to the society.
However, in full view of the fact that the defendant is detained for more than four months, and that there is no record of punishment for the defendant for the same kind of crime, that the first person who deposited a considerable part of the money and valuables received by the defendant and provided the money and valuables to the defendant wants to leave the defendant, that the money and valuables received in return for the solicitation are not more than 24 million won in total, and that the money and valuables received in return for the solicitation are not more than 24 million won, and other various sentencing conditions shown in the argument of this case, such as the defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, and circumstances after the crime, it is recognized that the punishment imposed by the court
Therefore, the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing is reasonable, and the prosecutor's assertion of unfair sentencing is without merit.
3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act as the defendant's appeal is reasonable.
Criminal facts
(b).