beta
Text
The judgment below
Part concerning Defendant A and B shall be reversed.
Defendant
A Imprisonment for eight months and fines for 3,000,000,000.
Reasons
1. The trial scope of this court against Defendant H is that the court below dismissed the prosecution against the Defendant on the grounds of violation of the Control of Illegal Check Act among the facts charged in this case, and sentenced the Defendant to two years of suspended execution of August by recognizing the remainder of the facts charged, and sentenced the Defendant to two years of suspended execution of imprisonment. Since the dismissal part of the prosecution against the conviction only became final and conclusive as it is by appeal against the part of the conviction, the scope of the
2. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendants: The sentence sentenced by the court below (10 months of imprisonment for Defendant A, 3 million won of fine for Defendant A, 8 months of suspended sentence, 2 years of suspended sentence, 6 months of imprisonment for Defendant B, 2 years of suspended sentence and 2 years of suspended sentence) is too unreasonable.
B. Prosecutor: The sentence imposed by the lower court on Defendant A and B is too unfased and unreasonable.
3. Determination
A. We also examine the Defendants and the Prosecutor’s improper claims on the sentencing of Defendant A and B.
Defendant
In light of the fact that: (a) the check issued by A and paid as a result of a lack of deposit and a disposition of suspension of transaction is equivalent to KRW 4 and KRW 65 million for face value; (b) the loan acquired by the Defendants by submitting to financial institutions an agreement on installment loan on the purchase of a second and second borrowed loan under the name of another person, which was forged by the Defendants; and (c) the Defendants did not recover from damage until then; (d) each of the above crimes was planned and intelligent to distribute funds; (e) Defendant B was sentenced to a suspended sentence of imprisonment for a crime similar to the instant crime; and (e) Defendant B was also sentenced to a suspended sentence of imprisonment for a crime similar to that of the instant crime; and (e) the criminal record, including criminal records, written in the judgment of the lower court, which was committed on January 2013, is also a criminal of a law similar to the instant crime.
shall not be deemed to exist.
However, damage to the crime of fraud of this case.