beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. The sentence imposed by the court below (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
2. The judgment of the defendant is in depth divided into the crime of this case, and the judgment of May 18, 2012 is in concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and there are circumstances in which the wife of the defendant is receiving aviation cancer treatment.
However, on October 2, 2007, the Defendant had been punished several times due to the same kind of crime, and was sentenced to two years of imprisonment due to fraud, etc., and committed the instant crime on April 3, 2009 when the execution of the sentence was completed, and again committed the instant crime during the repeated crime period.
The crime of this case is committed after the Defendant plans to pretend that he had an intent to repay the debt of installment loans by means of only one to two installment loans after acquiring the truck before committing the crime, and the crime is committed in that the Defendant led the Defendant, and the amount of fraud exceeds 200 million won, even though the Defendant did not have an intention or ability to repay the debt of installment loans, which is to be repaid instead of the debt of installment loans, which is to be repaid on the two truck owned by the victim. The crime of this case is committed by deceiving the victim as if he had an intention to repay the debt of installment loans, which is to pay only one to two installment loans after acquiring the truck. The crime of this case is committed in that the amount of
The social and economic adverse effects of the crime of this case, such as undermining the trust in the transactions of a heavy truck with a debt to be repaid due to the crime of this case, are also significant.
It was impossible to agree with the victim, and there was no particular loss repayment.
In addition, considering the age, character and conduct, environment, method of crime, and circumstances before and after the crime of this case, it is difficult to view that the sentence imposed by the court below is too unreasonable because it is too unreasonable.
3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is without merit and it is in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.