beta
Text
The judgment below
Part of the compensation order, except the compensation order, shall be reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.
Reasons
1. The sentence of the lower court (two years of imprisonment) against the accused against the summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable.
2. Before making a judgment on the grounds for appeal ex officio, the prosecutor applied for changes in indictment with the following facts charged (2018 Godan3388) from the trial court. This court permitted changes in the subject matter of the judgment by this court, and the remaining part shall be sentenced to one sentence in the case of conviction in relation to concurrent crimes. As such, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained.
3. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below is reversed without examining the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing, and the part of the court below's judgment excluding the compensation order pursuant to Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act is reversed, and it is again decided as follows through pleading.
【Reasons for the judgment in multiple times】criminal facts of the crime [2018 Highest 3222], [2018 Highest 3398] and [2018 Highest 4081] The criminal facts of this part recognized by the court are the same as the corresponding column of the judgment of the court below. Thus, they are cited as it is in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.
[2018 Godan3388] On June 7, 2018, the Defendant entered into an oral contract to contact the victim E (magalthal ju S9 Plus in an amount equivalent to 800,000 won, south and age 25) who carried a letter on the Internet J K bulletin board to purchase the said mobile phone at KRW 7.50,00,00,000, and then, the Defendant would want to receive the mobile phone from the victim who wants direct transaction by directly receiving the applicant to purchase the mobile phone and receiving the mobile phone. The Defendant would request the Internet Kwikset to deliver the article to the article. When the article received the mobile phone, the article would immediately transfer the price of KRW 750,000 to the account.”
However, the defendant runs as if he were to purchase a mobile phone and Kwikset service.