beta
Text
Defendant
All appeals filed by A and prosecutor are dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The sentence of the lower court (unfair sentencing) (two years of suspended sentence in October, community service, and additional collection) is too unreasonable.
B. The lower court’s sentence against the Defendants (Defendant A: Imprisonment with prison labor for 10 months on the two-year period of suspension of execution, community service, additional collection, and Defendant B: fine of 4 million won) is too unied and unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. The crime of this case with respect to Defendant A’s unfair judgment on the crime of this case is deemed to have obtained criminal proceeds under the pretext of providing female helpers to singing practice centers, etc. while the Defendant operated the term “passers” without registering it with the competent authority for about nine months. In light of the period and scale of the crime, criminal proceeds, etc., the nature of the crime is not weak in light of the period and scale of the crime and criminal proceeds.
In particular, the Defendant committed the instant crime even though he had a record of criminal punishment of KRW 3 million due to the same kind of crime in 2012.
On the other hand, the defendant recognized the crime of this case, is against the duty to work in good faith as an employee of the automobile maintenance business, and not to repeat the crime.
In full view of all such circumstances as the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, background of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, including these circumstances, in the instant case where there is no change in circumstances that are conditions for sentencing at the trial compared to the original judgment, the lower court’s punishment is only within the scope of reasonable discretion and is too heavy or unreasonable.
B. In comparison with the judgment of the court below as to the prosecutor's improper assertion of sentencing on Defendant B, there is no change in the conditions of sentencing at the court below, and the sentencing of the court below exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.
In addition, it is difficult to see the defendant's age, sex and environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc. are shown in the arguments in this case.