beta
Text
The judgment below
Part concerning Defendant B, C, and D among them shall be reversed.
Defendant
B Imprisonment with prison labor for one year, and Defendant C.
Reasons
1. The main sentence of the Defendants’ grounds for appeal is too unreasonable because the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable.
2. In light of the fact that the crime of larceny in oil pipelines, such as the instant case, consists of very professional and organizational plans, the nature of the crime is very poor, and the water methods are interviewed and interviewed, the sound distribution order of oil is harmed, and there is a high possibility of causing serious danger to public safety, and similar crimes of water law are not discontinued and the victim dopco demands strong punishment against the Defendants, it is necessary to strictly punish the Defendants.
A. The Defendant’s recognition of the instant crime against Defendant A is against the Defendant, and there is no record of punishment for the same kind of crime, and there is no record of criminal punishment except for punishment twice as a fine, and the fact that Defendant took part in the instant crime with the proposal of the principal offender N in an economically difficult situation is favorable or reasonable for the Defendant.
Meanwhile, each of the crimes of this case was conducted in the form of an occupied organization of M, etc. under the overall control of M, but the Defendant directly managed the oil storage facilities installed in the warehouse in relation to each of the crimes of this case among the crimes of this case, and played an important role in loading the stolen oil onto the cargo and transporting it to another place. The crime committed in the former North Korean territory was committed by the former North Korean territory while performing the role of moving the stolen oil from the warehouse to the first place of transport, but was involved in the crime of this case at least 175 times or for 8 months. The amount of damage to each of the crimes of this case exceeds 1.27 billion won, and even according to the statement of the Defendant, the Defendant took approximately KRW 30 million on an individual basis in relation to each of the crimes of this case, and did not take any measures to recover damage, etc. is disadvantageous to the Defendant.
Therefore, the above.