beta
Text
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendant
A shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,500,00 and by a fine of KRW 3,00,000, respectively.
Reasons
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., both types of punishment) that the court below rendered against the Defendants (e.g., a fine of 2.5 million won, Defendant B: a fine of 4.5 million won) is too unreasonable.
2. In the trial of the court, the prosecutor ex officio made an application for changes in the indictment against the Defendants as stated below in the criminal facts column, and the subject of the trial was changed by this court's permission.
Therefore, the judgment of the court below was no longer maintained.
3. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendants' assertion of unfair sentencing, and the judgment below is reversed and it is again decided as follows.
【Discretionary Judgment】 Criminal facts
1. Defendant A, around 01:00 on December 9, 2012, at the gallony road in the direction of the river basin in Eunpyeong-gu Seoul, Seoul, Defendant A acquired a gallony block mobile phone on the market price in which the victim D lost on the surface of the road in the direction of the river basin.
Defendant
A did not take necessary procedures, such as returning the acquired property to the victim, but did so.
Defendant
In full view of A’s act, Defendant A embezzled the property that was separated from the possession of the victim.
2. Defendant B, around 20:00 on December 20, 2012, at the front of the gallony road of Eunpyeong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, Defendant B received delivery from Defendant A with a view to selling a gallonal jusular phone instead of the victim D-owned market value.
Defendant
B knew of the fact that the above mobile phone was stolen, around December 21, 2012, around 03:45, the above mobile phone was sold to E in KRW 30,000.
Defendant
In full view of the acts B, Defendant B arranged for the transfer of stolen property.
Summary of Evidence
Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act is the same as the judgment below's corresponding column.