beta
Text
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendant
A Imprisonment with prison labor for one year, and for six months, for each of the defendants B.
Seized No. 1.
Reasons
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal that the court below sentenced the defendants to each punishment (one year and six months of imprisonment, and one year of imprisonment) is improper.
2. We examine the reasoning of appeal. Each of the crimes of this case, such as: (a) the Defendants entered Korea for the purpose of performing the duty to withdraw the so-called Bosing phishing crime; and (b) withdrawal of money obtained by deception through several times, and deposit money to other chief staff; (c) the crime of this case is not less than the nature of the crime in light of the content, method, and frequency of the crime; (d) the crime of Bosing phish is closely planned and organized against many unspecified persons; and (e) the social harm of the crime is serious; and (e) the Defendant A needs to strictly punish it; (c) the total sum of KRW 80 million from 48 victims; and (d) the Defendant B, the total sum of KRW 30 million from 9 victims of the above 48 victims; and (e) the amount of damage to which many victims and victims have not been fully recovered to the present.
However, the defendants recognized all the facts of the crime of this case in the trial of the party, and reflect their mistakes in depth. Defendant B relatively short of the participation period in each crime of this case, Defendant A agreed at the court below that 10 victims, including the victim K, and 3 victims, including the victim AG, in the trial of the party, and agreed that the amount of damage was paid to the victim BD, Defendant B agreed that 7 victims, including the victim K, and 3 victims, including the victim AA, and in the trial of the party. Defendant B agreed that the amount of damage was paid to the victim AB (not included in the facts of the crime of this case, but the victim AH and AM agreed that the amount of damage was paid to the victim AB. Defendant B was not included in the eight victims among the nine victims, and the remainder of the victim BD was from Defendant A.