beta
Text
Defendant
All appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant (one year and two months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
B. The above sentence, which the court below decided against the defendant, is too unhued and unfair.
2. Under the judgment on the reasons for appeal, the sentencing of the Defendant and the Prosecutor together are examined.
Considering the circumstances favorable to the defendant, such as the fact that the defendant was committed at the time of the crime of this case, the fact that there was no history of punishment exceeding the fine of the defendant, and that there was no history of punishment, etc., repeatedly deceiving the victim for about 133,830,00 won in total, but the amount obtained by the victim did not yet have been recovered from damage, and other circumstances that are disadvantageous to the defendant, such as the motive and background leading up to the crime of this case, the situation before and after the crime of this case, the defendant's age, sexual behavior, environment, occupation, family relation, etc., the punishment imposed by the court below cannot be deemed to be too heavy or unfair since the defendant's punishment imposed by the court below is too unaffortable or unafford. Thus, each of the unfair arguments of sentencing
3. In conclusion, the appeal filed by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit. Since the appeal filed by the defendant is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, it is so decided as per Disposition. However, according to each of the detailed statement of deposit and withdrawal transaction (one bank, one right 1 and one right 199 of the investigation records) and the statement of account transaction (20 pages 20 of the investigation records) as stated in the judgment below's "amount of damage" as stated in Article 25 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, the "amount of damage" as stated in No. 16 of the No. 16 and No. 17 of the No. 1,200 and the "1,50,000" as stated in No. 16 are "1,30,000" respectively, they shall be corrected ex officio pursuant to Article 25 (1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure.