beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
The defendant pays 2,127,800 won to the applicant W.
Reasons
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) by the lower court (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
2. The circumstances favorable to the defendant include: (a) the defendant was the first offender; (b) the defendant was repenting his/her mistake in depth; and (c) the victims do not want punishment by mutual agreement with five of the victims.
On the other hand, the crime of this case is a case where the defendant acquired 16 victims the total sum of 54 million won under the name of 16 victims, such as airline fees, hotel expenses, etc., and the crime of this case is not good, and the victims who prepared for the new divorce travel seem to have suffered considerable mental and economic damage, and even if the remaining 11 victims have not been paid properly up to the trial of the case, etc., are disadvantageous to the defendant.
In full view of the above circumstances and other factors of sentencing, including the background of the instant crime, the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, and environment, etc., the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable as it is too unreasonable, and thus, the Defendant’s assertion is without merit.
3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed under Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the defendant's appeal is dismissed under Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the applicant's application for compensation filed in the trial for compensation is justified within the scope of KRW 2,127,80,00, which is the money obtained through deception, and since the scope of the remaining claim for consolation money is unclear and there is no reason to do so, the remaining part of claim for consolation money shall be accepted within the scope of the above recognition pursuant to Article 25 (1) 1, Article 31 (1), (2), and (3) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings. It is so decided as per Disposition (the "victims AA" of the judgment of the court below 3rd 9 is each error of "victim N," and "victim AA" of the 7th 14th son is correct ex officio pursuant to Article 25 (1) of the Regulation on Criminal Procedure).