beta
Text
The judgment below
The guilty part against Defendant A and the part against Defendant C and E, respectively, shall be reversed.
Defendant .
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendant A (1) misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles - Defendant A did not participate in the fraud crimes listed in Nos. 1, 2, and 4 of the Attached Table of Crimes Nos. 1, 2, and 4 as indicated in the judgment of the court below.
Even if the above crime does not constitute a concurrent crime of fraud by defraudation of property of KRW 75,00,000, as in the judgment of the court below, it shall be deemed that the comprehensive crime of fraud is established by defraudation of property of KRW 10,150,00 or KRW 11,150,000, which was the sum of the amounts actually lost or actually repaid by the victim after borrowing from the Defendant A, etc.
(2) The sentence imposed by the lower court on Defendant A (two years and six months of imprisonment, five years of suspended execution, etc.) is too unreasonable.
B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court to Defendant C (a 3 years of imprisonment and fine of KRW 5,00,000, etc.) is too unreasonable.
C. The punishment sentenced by the lower court to Defendant E (two years and six months of imprisonment, four years of suspended execution, and fine of KRW 2,00,000, etc.) is too unreasonable.
(1) The prosecutor (with regard to the acquittal portion of the defendant A), in the event that the members of the fraud gambling group repeats the same victim under the prior conspiracy with the same criminal act, there is no need to share the mechanical and physical role of each of the whole criminal acts with respect to the members. In full view of the facts acknowledged by the victim L and the case-related S, T, U, and H's statements and some of the statements made by the defendant C, who is the accomplice, it is clear that the defendant A repeats a series of criminal acts under the prior conspiracy with the defendant C, X, and the defendant A repeats a series of criminal acts. Thus, the defendant A has committed the criminal acts on September 9, 201 and the criminal acts on September 24, 201 [the criminal acts on September 3, 2011 and the criminal acts on September 24, 2011], and conducted the criminal acts on September 24, 2011. The judgment of the court below acquitted this part of the charges.
(2) The lower court’s decision is unreasonable.