beta
Text
Defendant
A All appeals filed against the Defendants by the Prosecutor and the Prosecutor are dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The lower court’s sentence (a year and June, and confiscation) against Defendant A is too unreasonable.
B. The Prosecutor’s sentence (for the Defendants, 10 months of imprisonment, 2 years of suspended execution, 120 hours of probation observation, and 120 hours of community service) against Defendant A is deemed to be too uneasy and unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. We also examine the judgment and Defendant A’s assertion of unfair sentencing with respect to Defendant A.
Defendant
A Confession of the instant crime after the pronouncement of the lower judgment, etc. is favorable.
However, the crime of this case was committed with oil below the quantity by a new method that operates the program of the main organic computer and caused unfair profits by deceiving a large number of consumers as if the facility was sold in the fixed quantity, and thereby undermining the sound distribution order of oil, and the quality of the crime is not very good. Defendant A was sentenced to imprisonment for the same crime, and Defendant A was sentenced to imprisonment for the same crime, and did not reflect the wrongness while changing the name of the previous gas station and operated it for a new gas station for more than five months, and acquired unjust profits exceeding KRW 100 million during the period exceeding five months.
In full view of all the circumstances, such as the above circumstances and the Defendant A’s age, sexual conduct, environment, family relationship, motive, means, and consequence of the crime, and the sentencing conditions indicated in the instant records and arguments after the crime, the lower court’s punishment against Defendant A is too heavy or unbrupted so that it cannot be deemed unfair.
Therefore, Defendant A and Prosecutor’s above assertion are without merit.
B. The judgment of Defendant B on the wrongful argument of sentencing against Defendant B is against the confession of the instant crime from the time when the investigation was conducted, Defendant B did not have the same criminal record, and Defendant B was an employee of the gas station operated by Defendant A.