The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.
The seized 50,000 won note 8(No. 2), receipt.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing: imprisonment with prison labor and two months; confiscation) imposed by the lower court is too unfeasible and unreasonable.
2. We also examine the arguments of the Defendant and the Prosecutor.
The circumstances are favorable to the defendant, such as the fact that the defendant did not have economic difficulties and seems to have reached the crime of this case in response to the revolving of the licensing organization, the fact that the profits acquired by the defendant seems not to be significant, and the fact that the defendant reflects his mistake and repents it.
However, as in the instant case, the crime of Bophishing fraud is highly harmful to society, such as that the method of committing the crime is organized, planned intelligence and a large number of victims, and that the withdrawal and delivery of cash is an essential element to complete the crime of fraud due to the nature of the crime of Bophishing, so it cannot be deemed that the degree of involvement of the Defendant cannot be deemed that the degree of involvement of the Defendant is light. In particular, since the total amount of damage is 150,4820,00 won and the damage was not recovered, the Defendant committed the crime of unlicensed driving in this case even though he had the history of punishment several times due to drunk driving and without a license, the Defendant committed the crime of this case, even though he had the history of punishment several times, and the number and distance from the number of times of unauthorized Driving, and other various circumstances, such as the Defendant’s age, character and behavior, status, environment, the circumstances and result of the instant crime, etc., it is unfair to view the Defendant’s sentence against the Defendant.
The defendant's above assertion is without merit, and the prosecutor's above assertion is with merit.
3. Since the appeal by the prosecutor of the conclusion is well-grounded, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the following is ruled
Article 25(1), Article 31(1), Article 31(2), and Article 25(1), Article 31(1), 2, of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings are all reasonable